IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/jbecon/v94y2024i5d10.1007_s11573-023-01184-2.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Academic success is in the eye of the beholder: understanding scholars’ implicit appointment preferences through adaptive choice-based conjoint analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Laura Graf

    (Technical University of Munich)

  • Marlen Rimbeck

    (Technische Universität Bergakademie Freiberg)

  • Jutta Stumpf-Wollersheim

    (Technische Universität Bergakademie Freiberg)

  • Isabell M. Welpe

    (Technical University of Munich)

Abstract

Because scholarly performance is multidimensional, many different criteria may influence appointment decisions. Previous studies on appointment preferences do not reveal the underlying process on how appointment committee members consider and weigh up different criteria when they evaluate candidates. To identify scholars’ implicit appointment preferences, we used adaptive choice-based conjoint analysis (ACBC), which is able to capture the non-compensatory process of complex decisions like personnel selection. Junior and senior scholars (N = 681) from different countries and types of higher education institutions took part in a hypothetical appointment procedure. A two-step segmentation analysis based on unsupervised and supervised learning revealed three distinct patterns of appointment preferences. More specifically, scholars differ in the appointment criteria they prefer to use, that is, they make different trade-offs when they evaluate candidates who fulfill some but not all of their expectations. The most important variable for predicting scholars’ preferences is the country in which he or she is currently living. Other important predictors of appointment preferences were, for example, scholars’ self-reported research performance and whether they work at a doctorate-granting or not-doctorate-granting higher education institution. A comparison of scholars’ implicit and explicit preferences yielded considerable discrepancies. Through the lens of cognitive bias theory, we contribute to the extension of the literature on professorial appointments by an implicit process perspective and provide insights for scholars and higher education institutions.

Suggested Citation

  • Laura Graf & Marlen Rimbeck & Jutta Stumpf-Wollersheim & Isabell M. Welpe, 2024. "Academic success is in the eye of the beholder: understanding scholars’ implicit appointment preferences through adaptive choice-based conjoint analysis," Journal of Business Economics, Springer, vol. 94(5), pages 725-761, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:jbecon:v:94:y:2024:i:5:d:10.1007_s11573-023-01184-2
    DOI: 10.1007/s11573-023-01184-2
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11573-023-01184-2
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11573-023-01184-2?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Currim, Imran S & Weinberg, Charles B & Wittink, Dick R, 1981. "Design of Subscription Programs for a Performing Arts Series," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 8(1), pages 67-75, June.
    2. Eric Luis Uhlmann & Keith Leavitt & Jochen I. Menges & Michael Howe & Russell E. Johnson & Joel Koopman, 2012. "Getting Explicit About the Implicit: A Taxonomy of Implicit Measures and Guide for Their Use in Organizational Research," Post-Print hal-00743353, HAL.
    3. Vishal Narayan & Vithala R. Rao & Carolyne Saunders, 2011. "How Peer Influence Affects Attribute Preferences: A Bayesian Updating Mechanism," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 30(2), pages 368-384, 03-04.
    4. Ken Deal, 2014. "Segmenting Patients and Physicians Using Preferences from Discrete Choice Experiments," The Patient: Patient-Centered Outcomes Research, Springer;International Academy of Health Preference Research, vol. 7(1), pages 5-21, March.
    5. Deborah Meizlish & Matthew Kaplan, 2008. "Valuing and Evaluating Teaching in Academic Hiring: A Multidisciplinary, Cross-Institutional Study," The Journal of Higher Education, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 79(5), pages 489-512, September.
    6. T.K. Das & Bing‐Sheng Teng, 1999. "Cognitive Biases and Strategic Decision Processes: An Integrative Perspective," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(6), pages 757-778, November.
    7. Peter J. Lenk & Wayne S. DeSarbo & Paul E. Green & Martin R. Young, 1996. "Hierarchical Bayes Conjoint Analysis: Recovery of Partworth Heterogeneity from Reduced Experimental Designs," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 15(2), pages 173-191.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Maren Hein & Peter Kurz & Winfried J. Steiner, 2020. "Analyzing the capabilities of the HB logit model for choice-based conjoint analysis: a simulation study," Journal of Business Economics, Springer, vol. 90(1), pages 1-36, February.
    2. Robert Zeithammer & Peter Lenk, 2006. "Bayesian estimation of multivariate-normal models when dimensions are absent," Quantitative Marketing and Economics (QME), Springer, vol. 4(3), pages 241-265, September.
    3. James Agarwal & Wayne DeSarbo & Naresh K. Malhotra & Vithala Rao, 2015. "An Interdisciplinary Review of Research in Conjoint Analysis: Recent Developments and Directions for Future Research," Customer Needs and Solutions, Springer;Institute for Sustainable Innovation and Growth (iSIG), vol. 2(1), pages 19-40, March.
    4. Angelo Rosa, 2023. "Organizational Training in Startups: The Incubators Perspective in Turbulent Times," International Journal of Business and Management, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 18(4), pages 1-1, August.
    5. Charles Cunningham & Ken Deal & Yvonne Chen, 2010. "Adaptive Choice-Based Conjoint Analysis," The Patient: Patient-Centered Outcomes Research, Springer;International Academy of Health Preference Research, vol. 3(4), pages 257-273, December.
    6. Marullo, Cristina & Ahn, Joon Mo, 2024. "Knowledge tensions and decision-making challenges in open innovation: Standardization as a de-biasing mechanism," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 136(C).
    7. Rydén, Pernille & Ringberg, Torsten & Wilke, Ricky, 2015. "How Managers' Shared Mental Models of Business–Customer Interactions Create Different Sensemaking of Social Media," Journal of Interactive Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 31(C), pages 1-16.
    8. Patrick Krieger & Carsten Lausberg, 2021. "Entscheidungen, Entscheidungsfindung und Entscheidungsunterstützung in der Immobilienwirtschaft: Eine systematische Literaturübersicht [Decisions, decision-making and decisions support systems in r," Zeitschrift für Immobilienökonomie (German Journal of Real Estate Research), Springer;Gesellschaft für Immobilienwirtschaftliche Forschung e. V., vol. 7(1), pages 1-33, April.
    9. Fang Di & Richards Timothy J. & Grebitus Carola, 2019. "Modeling Product Choices in a Peer Network," Forum for Health Economics & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 22(1), pages 1-13, June.
    10. Fasolo, Barbara & Heard, Claire & Scopelliti, Irene, 2024. "Mitigating cognitive bias to improve organizational decisions: an integrative review, framework, and research agenda," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 125404, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    11. Walid Cheffi, 2008. "Etude Des Roles De La Comptabilite De Gestion Pour Les Managers : Le Cas D'Un Grand Groupe Automobile," Post-Print halshs-00522472, HAL.
    12. Fang, Di & Richards, Timothy, 2016. "New Maize Variety Adoption in Mozambique: A Spatial Approach," 2016 Annual Meeting, July 31-August 2, Boston, Massachusetts 235388, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    13. Dubey, Subodh & Sharma, Ishant & Mishra, Sabyasachee & Cats, Oded & Bansal, Prateek, 2022. "A General Framework to Forecast the Adoption of Novel Products: A Case of Autonomous Vehicles," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 165(C), pages 63-95.
    14. Gerard P. Hodgkinson & Barbara Burkhard & Nicolai J. Foss & Dietmar Grichnik & Riikka M. Sarala & Yi Tang & Marc Van Essen, 2023. "The Heuristics and Biases of Top Managers: Past, Present, and Future," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 60(5), pages 1033-1063, July.
    15. John Liechty & Duncan Fong & Eelko Huizingh & Arnaud Bruyn, 2008. "Hierarchical Bayesian conjoint models incorporating measurement uncertainty," Marketing Letters, Springer, vol. 19(2), pages 141-155, June.
    16. Eggers, Felix & Sattler, Henrik, 2009. "Hybrid individualized two-level choice-based conjoint (HIT-CBC): A new method for measuring preference structures with many attribute levels," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 26(2), pages 108-118.
    17. Manalo, Alberto B., 1989. "Benefits Sought by Apple Consumers," Working Papers 115908, Regional Research Project NE-165 Private Strategies, Public Policies, and Food System Performance.
    18. Mercedes Bleda & Elisabeth Krull & Jonatan Pinkse & Eleni Christodoulou, 2023. "Organizational heuristics and firms' sensemaking for climate change adaptation," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 32(8), pages 6124-6137, December.
    19. Yu, Jie & Goos, Peter & Vandebroek, Martina, 2011. "Individually adapted sequential Bayesian conjoint-choice designs in the presence of consumer heterogeneity," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 28(4), pages 378-388.
    20. Kick, Markus & Littich, Martina, 2015. "Brand and Reputation as Quality Signals on Regulated Markets," EconStor Preprints 182503, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Appointment preferences; Higher education; Adaptive choice-based conjoint analysis; Implicit preferences; Decision-making; Personnel selection;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • I23 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Education - - - Higher Education; Research Institutions
    • J21 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Demand and Supply of Labor - - - Labor Force and Employment, Size, and Structure
    • M12 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Business Administration - - - Personnel Management; Executives; Executive Compensation
    • M51 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Personnel Economics - - - Firm Employment Decisions; Promotions

    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:spr:jbecon:v:94:y:2024:i:5:d:10.1007_s11573-023-01184-2. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.