IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/osf/osfxxx/r63uz.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Rise of the Most Excellent Scholar, Demise of the Field: A Fictional Story, Yet Probable Destiny

Author

Listed:
  • Orhan, Mehmet A.

    (EM Normandie Business School)

  • Bal, P. Matthijs
  • van Rossenberg, Yvonne

Abstract

This article presents a fictional narrative about Professor Sackker, the solitary researcher in the field of Sackker Studies, once known as Management and Organizational Studies. Despite its absurdity, the story portrays Sackker’s dominance, marked by his inevitable rise with record-breaking publications and citations, stifling competition, and leaving him as the ultimate winner and ruler. Through personal reflections, his story explores his career strategies, provides insights into his success, and explains how he shaped, transformed, and eventually (but unwittingly) destroyed the field. This narrative, though fictional, mirrors real concerns in today’s reality: growing inequalities, the dominance of elite scholars, and erosion of meaning in academic careers as a function of hyper-competition. We examine the prevalence of systemic issues plaguing academia. Despite challenges, the article also aims to inspire hope. By illuminating these problems and integrating them into scholarly discussions, there lies an opportunity for change, empowering the next generation of academics.

Suggested Citation

  • Orhan, Mehmet A. & Bal, P. Matthijs & van Rossenberg, Yvonne, 2024. "Rise of the Most Excellent Scholar, Demise of the Field: A Fictional Story, Yet Probable Destiny," OSF Preprints r63uz, Center for Open Science.
    • Handle: RePEc:osf:osfxxx:r63uz
    DOI: 10.31219/osf.io/r63uz
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://osf.io/download/66a229b92b2fb0799c2406cb/
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.31219/osf.io/r63uz?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. Neil A. Lewis, 2022. "What universities say versus do about diversity, equity and inclusion," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 6(5), pages 610-610, May.
    3. Jerzy Kociatkiewicz & Monika Kostera, 2024. "Writing Differently: On the Constraints and Possibilities of Presenting Research Rooted in Feminist Epistemologies," Gender, Work and Organization, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(1), pages 284-304, January.
    4. Susanne Täuber & Morteza Mahmoudi, 2022. "How bullying becomes a career tool," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 6(4), pages 475-475, April.
    5. Jerzy Kociatkiewicz & Monika Kostera, 2024. "Writing differently: on the constraints and possibilities of presenting research rooted in feminist epistemologies," Post-Print hal-04243729, HAL.
    6. Pierre Azoulay & Christian Fons-Rosen & Joshua S. Graff Zivin, 2019. "Does Science Advance One Funeral at a Time?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 109(8), pages 2889-2920, August.
    7. Monika Kostera, 2022. "How to write differently‎ : a quest for meaningful academic writing‎," Post-Print hal-03817256, HAL.
    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. Orhan, Mehmet A. & van Rossenberg, Yvonne & Bal, P. Matthijs, 2024. "Authorship inequality and elite dominance in management and organizational research: A review of six decades," OSF Preprints tzx92, Center for Open Science.
    2. 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.
    3. Tamay Besiroglu & Nicholas Emery-Xu & Neil Thompson, 2022. "Economic impacts of AI-augmented R&D," Papers 2212.08198, arXiv.org, revised Jan 2023.
    4. Hussinger, Katrin & Pellens, Maikel, 2019. "Guilt by association: How scientific misconduct harms prior collaborators," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(2), pages 516-530.
    5. Hager, Sebastian & Schwarz, Carlo & Waldinger, Fabian, 2023. "Measuring Science: Performance Metrics and the Allocation of Talent," CEPR Discussion Papers 18248, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    6. Eugenie Dugoua & Todd Gerarden, 2023. "Induced Innovation, Inventors, and the Energy Transition," NBER Working Papers 31714, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    7. Sam Arts & Lee Fleming, 2018. "Paradise of Novelty—Or Loss of Human Capital? Exploring New Fields and Inventive Output," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 29(6), pages 1074-1092, December.
    8. Pierre Azoulay & Benjamin F. Jones & J. Daniel Kim & Javier Miranda, 2020. "Age and High-Growth Entrepreneurship," American Economic Review: Insights, American Economic Association, vol. 2(1), pages 65-82, March.
    9. Eugenie Dugoua, 2023. "Induced Innovation and International Environmental Agreements: Evidence from the Ozone Regime," CESifo Working Paper Series 10669, CESifo.
    10. Escolar, Emerson G. & Hiraoka, Yasuaki & Igami, Mitsuru & Ozcan, Yasin, 2023. "Mapping firms’ locations in technological space: A topological analysis of patent statistics," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(8).
    11. Ana Teresa Santos & Sandro Mendonça, 2022. "Do papers (really) match journals’ “aims and scope”? A computational assessment of innovation studies," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(12), pages 7449-7470, December.
    12. Galasso, Alberto & Luo, Hong & Zhu, Brooklynn, 2023. "Laboratory safety and research productivity," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(8).
    13. Sawan Rathi & Anindya S. Chakrabarti & Chirantan Chatterjee & Aparna Hegde, 2022. "Pandemics and technology engagement: New evidence from m‐Health intervention during COVID‐19 in India," Review of Development Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 26(4), pages 2184-2217, November.
    14. Peter Andre & Armin Falk, 2021. "What’s Worth Knowing? Economists’ Opinions about Economics," ECONtribute Discussion Papers Series 102, University of Bonn and University of Cologne, Germany.
    15. Edgar D. Zanotto & Vinicius Carvalho, 2021. "Article age- and field-normalized tools to evaluate scientific impact and momentum," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(4), pages 2865-2883, April.
    16. Prithwiraj Choudhury & Kirk Doran & Astrid Marinoni & Chungeun Yoon, 2022. "Loss of Peers and Individual Worker Performance: Evidence from H-1B Visa Denials," CESifo Working Paper Series 10152, CESifo.
    17. Khanna, Rajat, 2023. "Passing the torch of knowledge: Star death, collaborative ties, and knowledge creation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(1).
    18. Jaime A. Teixeira da Silva, 2021. "The i100-index, i1000-index and i10,000-index: expansion and fortification of the Google Scholar h-index for finer-scale citation descriptions and researcher classification," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(4), pages 3667-3672, April.
    19. Maziar Montazerian & Edgar Dutra Zanotto & Hellmut Eckert, 2020. "Prolificacy and visibility versus reputation in the hard sciences," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 123(1), pages 207-221, April.
    20. Wei Fu & Shin-Yi Chou & Li-San Wang, 2022. "NIH Grant Expansion, Ancestral Diversity and Scientific Discovery in Genomics Research," NBER Working Papers 30155, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:osf:osfxxx:r63uz. 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: OSF (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://osf.io/preprints/ .

    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.