University–industry collaboration in Italy: A bibliometric examination

This work investigates public–private research collaboration between Italian universities and domestic industry, applying a bibliometric type of approach.The study is based on an exhaustive listing of all co-authored publications in international journals that are jointly realized by Italian university scientists and researchers in the private sector; this listing permits the development of a national mapping system for public–private collaboration that is unique for its extensive and representative character. It is shown that, in absolute terms, most collaborations occur in medicine and chemistry, while it is industrial and information engineering that shows the highest percentage of co-authored articles out of all articles in the field.In addition, the investigation empirically examines and tests several hypotheses concerning the qualitative–quantitative impact of collaboration on the scientific production of individual university researchers. The analyses demonstrate that university researchers who collaborate with those in the private sector show research performance that is superior to that of colleagues who are not involved in such collaboration. But the impact factor of journals publishing academic articles co-authored by industry is generally lower than that concerning co-authorships with other entities. Finally, a further specific elaboration also reveals that publications with public–private co-authorship do not show a level of multidisciplinarity that is significantly different from that of other publications.     

On the relation between intellectual collaboration and intellectual output: Evidence from the finance academe

This paper tests the relation between intellectual collaboration and the quality of the intellectual output using academic papers published in prestigious finance journals during 1988–2005. We use the number of authors of a paper to measure the extent of intellectual collaboration and the number of citations that a paper receives (adjusted by the number of years since the paper's publication) as a measure of its intellectual value. Based on empirical tests, we find that papers with more authors are cited more often. This relation does not hold for purely theoretical papers. Coauthoring with a prolific author leads to higher quality papers, but coauthoring with colleagues at the same institution leads to neither higher nor lower quality papers. Papers with four authors are cited most often. Overall, when it comes to intellectual collaboration, our results counter the notion that “too many cooks spoil the broth.”     

What do we [not] know about technology entrepreneurship research?

This study aims to review what we do (and do not) know about technology entrepreneurship (TE) research to date. Based on a categorized bibliometric analysis resulting from a systematic review of 135 scientific articles published in refereed journals over the past 27 years (1986–2013), we identify the core domains of TE, its intellectual structure, the scientific journals with a major impact in this field of research, and the affiliation and collaboration networks within it. Specifically, through a detailed analysis of article co-citations within the TE area, this study provides co-citation networks of authors, journals, and their respective clusters, revealing their rankings in terms of contributions to the TE literature. This comprehensive analysis can be used to enhance our understanding of TE and support further research in this field.     

Modeling the diffusion of scientific publications

This paper illustrates that salient features of a panel of time series of annual citations can be captured by a Bass type diffusion model. We put forward an extended version of this diffusion model, where we consider the relation between key characteristics of the diffusion process and features of the articles. More specifically, parameters measuring citations’ ceiling and the timing of peak citations are correlated with specific features of the articles like the number of pages and the number of authors. Our approach amounts to a multi-level non-linear regression for a panel of time series. We illustrate our model for citations to articles that were published in Econometrica and the Journal of Econometrics. Amongst other things, we find that more references lead to more citations and that for the Journal of Econometrics peak citations of more recent articles tend to occur later.     

On the dynamics of national scientific systems

Coauthorship links actors at the micro-level of scientists. Through electronic databases we now have enough information to compare entire research disciplines over time. We compare the complete longitudinal coauthorship networks for four research disciplines (biotechnology, mathematics, physics and sociology) for 1986–2005. We examined complete bibliographies of all researchers registered at the national Slovene Research Agency. Known hypotheses were confirmed as were three new hypotheses. There were different coauthoring cultures. However, these cultures changed over time in Slovenia. The number of coauthored publications grew much faster than solo authored productions, especially after independence in 1991 and the integration of Slovenian science into broader EU systems. Trajectories of types of coauthorship differed across the disciplines. Using blockmodeling, we show how coauthorship structures change in all disciplines. The most frequent form was a core-periphery structure with multiple simple cores, a periphery and a semi-periphery. The next most frequent form had this structure but with bridging cores. Bridging cores consolidate the center of a discipline by giving it greater coherence. These consolidated structures appeared at different times in different disciplines, appearing earliest in physics and latest in biotechnology. In 2005, biotechnology had the most consolidated center followed by physics and sociology. All coauthorship networks expanded over time. By far, new recruits went into either the semi-periphery or the periphery in all fields. Two ‘lab’ fields, biotechnology and physics, have larger semi-peripheries than peripheries. The reverse holds for mathematics and sociology, two ‘office’ disciplines. Institutional affiliations and shared interests all impact the structure of collaboration in subtle ways.     

Two Hundred Years of Accounting Research

Recent investigations suggest that research assessments are mainly based on publication counts and journal level and, hence, fail at capturing the multifaceted nature of research performance. Instead, some commentators indicate that focus on the article's contribution would stimulate a more polycentric approach to research. In the current study we investigate the role of an article's contribution on its citations. In doing this, we gather data from European Accounting Review, an outlet that plays an instrumental role in the dissemination of Europe-based accounting research and that holds a long tradition of tolerance towards the use of diverse research methods and paradigms. We employ proxies to evaluate the objective contribution of an article as well as author reputation. Our findings suggest that articles are cited for their contribution rather than as a result of the characteristics of their authors. Our study also poses some suggestions to capture the multifaceted nature of research performance.     

JMS at 50: Trends over Time

We present an analysis of the articles published in the Journal of Management Studies since its inception to assess to what extent JMS has: maintained its leading international ranking; maintained its founding mission as a broad based management journal; and remained a broad based management journal compared to other general management journals. In terms of its impact factor and citations despite reaching a low point in 2001, we find that JMS today ranks higher than it has ever done throughout its 50‐year history. From our content analysis covering the life‐cycle of JMS, we find four areas have been the most frequently represented, although their relative importance varies between decades: Organizational Management/Behaviour, Strategy, Human Resource Management, and General Management, accounting for 67 per cent of articles published over the period. JMS has strengthened its international author distribution through the increase in authors from the EU especially; the period 2000–04 which saw the predominance of UK authors was an anomaly. There are marked differences between type of article and author country of origin. Our comparative analysis of the word networks between the journals JMS, AMJ, ASQ, and HRM shows that over each decade the papers in the first three normally form a single cluster, indicating that the words used in the papers in the different journals are similar, while papers from HRM often form an outlining group. Notably, in the early 2000s papers in JMS form a distinct cluster, with papers from HRM paralleling the anomaly identified in the content analysis. Overall, JMS has regained its distinctiveness as a broad‐based international management journal, not favouring any particular theoretical or empirical approach.     

The visibility effects of Amex listing

This study examines whether visibility changes for companies moving from Nasdaq to the Amex. A control sample of companies that did not leave the Nasdaq Stock Market serves as a basis for comparing changes in visibility. Four proxies are used to measure visibility: (1) the number of analysts estimating the company’s next fiscal year’s earnings (NOA), (2) the number of institutional shareholders (NOI), (3) the number of shares held by institutions (NOS), and (4) the number of citations in The Wall Street Journal (NOC). The initial evidence supports a relationship between Amex listing and visibility gains when measured by NOI, NOS, and NOC. Small companies show significant visibility gains in NOA. The findings contain evidence that companies seeking Amex listing are generally neglected by analysts and institutions. Regression analysis provides additional evidence that Amex listing, not earnings growth, helps to explain visibility gains in NOI, NOS, and NOC.     

Ranking journal quality by harmonic mean of ranks: an application to ISI statistics & probability

As the preponderance of journal rankings becomes increasingly more frequent and prominent in academic decision making, such rankings in broad discipline categories is taking on an increasingly important role. The paper focuses on the robustness of rankings of academic journal quality and research impact using the widely‐used Thomson Reuters ISI Web of Science citations database (ISI) for the Statistics & Probability category. The paper analyses 110 ISI international journals in Statistics & Probability using quantifiable research assessment measures (RAMs), and highlights the similarities and differences in various RAMs, which are based on alternative transformations of citations and influence. Alternative RAMs may be calculated annually or updated daily to determine when, where and how (frequently) published papers are cited (see Chang, McAleer and Oxley (2011a, b, c) , Chang, Maasoumi and McAleer (2012) ). The RAMs are grouped in four distinct classes that include impact factor, mean citations and non‐citations, journal policy, number of high quality papers, and journal influence and article influence. These classes include the most widely used RAMs, namely the classic 2‐year impact factor including journal self citations (2YIF), 2‐year impact factor excluding journal self citations (2YIF^*), 5‐year impact factor including journal self citations (5YIF), Eigenfactor (or Journal Influence), Article Influence, h‐index, PI‐BETA (Papers Ignored – By Even The Authors), 5YD2 (= 5YIF/2YIF) as a measure of citations longevity, and escalating self citations as a measure of increasing journal self citations. The paper highlights robust rankings based on the harmonic mean of the ranks of RAMs across the 4 classes. It is shown that focusing solely on the 2YIF of a journal, which partly answers the question as to when published papers are cited, to the exclusion of other informative RAMs, which answer where and how (frequently) published papers are cited, can lead to a distorted evaluation of journal quality, impact and influence relative to the more robust harmonic mean of the ranks.     

Similarities and differences in international and comparative human resource management: A review of 60 years of research

In this article, we review similarities and differences in articles in the research field of international and comparative human resource management (HRM), published in Human Resource Management over the past 60 years. The extensive review and analysis, based on 189 conceptual articles, reviews, and empirical studies, identified several trends. First, the two distinct research streams in this research field (HRM in MNEs and comparative HRM) have grown over the decades and moved from conceptual articles in the beginning to almost exclusively empirical studies in more recent years. Second, in addition to the two research streams, in more recent years we identified a third research stream that combines elements of HRM in MNEs and comparative HRM research. Third, the research field has become more feminized, with an increasing number of female (first) authors, and has become more international, with more authors affiliated with non‐US universities in the more recent time periods. Finally, while the research streams show some differences in the content of their research, we do not find evidence that the streams developed in isolation. Based on our analysis, we provide suggestions for future research on international and comparative HRM and identify current implications for HR practitioners.     

Increasing the Impact of Heterodox Work: Insights from RoSE

To help understand what enhances the prospects for heterodox work to have strong research impact, this article analyzes the pool of articles published in the Review of Social Economy in the past 15 years, aiming to identify what differentiates well‐cited articles from others. Well‐cited papers tend to be in areas of core concern in social economics (labor, health, social theory) and attract attention in related social sciences and policy fields. Yet about half the articles published in RoSE are not cited in another scholarly journal within three years of publication, suggesting that, as well done and interesting as these papers may be, problems like narrow focus seem to limit their influence on other people's work. The article's results suggest that increasing the impact of heterodox work requires articles to be interesting and accessible to intentionally broad audiences, and to prompt people to change their thinking. Better still if they open up channels of communication between diverse communities of scholars that are likely to be sustained.     

Erratum

An error resulted in an incorrect volume listing on all articles published in Business Strategy and the Environment Volume 18, Issue 3. This affects the bibliographic information in the top‐left hand corner of each article's first page, and in the footers throughout the issue. The volume listing should have read 18, not 19. The articles published online have been corrected. Please accept the Publisher's apologies for any confusion caused.     

Information systems project management in PMJ: A brief history

The Project Management Institute (PMI) plays an important role in the training, career development, and recognition of information systems (IS) project managers. Indeed, not only do IS professionals account for a large proportion of the PMI constituency, but PMI is also influential in the training of IS project managers. This study explores further the contribution of PMI to IS project management by means of its main publication outlet, the Project Management Journal (PMJ). To do so, the contents of the 39 IS project management articles published in PMJ during 1988–2005 were analyzed. The article focuses on the following dimensions: the relative importance of IS project management articles published by PMJ; the profile of the authors of IS project management articles in PMJ; the main issues, in terms of IS project management, covered by PMJ; and the major gaps, in terms of IS project management, in the coverage of this domain by PMJ.     

Institutional affiliation of contributors to the American Economic Review, 1981–1990

In this article the author examines the institutional origin of authors in theAmerican Economic Review between 1981–90. Institutions are categorized into four broad groups, and rankings of institutions based on the number of pages/articles in theAER are developed. A high correlation is noted between the rankings in this paper and previous similar attempts. The main contribution of this study lies in its updating of earlier work.     

Introduction

Leadership is under review and open for criticism in ways not seen for some time. Where is leadership when we need it, we ask? Where are the leaders who can solve our problems? Moreover, change is the new constant, and we need leaders who are prepared to embrace change and ambiguity and help followers deal with change. Sometimes it feels like we are in permanent whitewater. Where are the leaders who can deal with the ever‐changing landscape and help us move to a positive future? Many of them are among us. They are the up‐and‐coming emerging leaders of Generations X and Y. This symposium focuses on these leaders of the future—the emerging leaders among us. What challenges do they face? What kind of leaders do they want to be? How do we best prepare them? The five articles that follow present a variety of views for our consideration, and the authors hope to start a boarder conversation about the next generation of leaders and their leadership challenges. Mhatre and Conger stress that authentic leadership principles are needed in workplaces now and in the future. They remind us that organizations are often composed of individuals born during different times, circumstances,and situations, thereby creating challenges for leaders in those organizations. Current research related to Gens X and Y, cited by the authors, highlights some of the generational differences and preferences. The authors see that the differences could create a “fertile ground for intraorganizational conflict, especially differences in how to manage and work within changing organizational climates.” One potential solution, according to Mhatre and Conger, can be found in the four components of authentic leadership principles: self‐awareness, internalized moral perspective, balanced processing, and relational transparency. If authentic leadership is in place, Gens X and Y can lead authentically, thereby facilitating sustainable and positive work environments. The authors predict positive results for organizations when authentic leadership is in place. Carucci and Epperson also focus on cross‐generational relationships and voice their concern with the negative consequences of labeling various age groups as Millennials, Boomers, Xers, Yers—labels that emphasize the divide. What we need, they argue, is less polarization and more connections. The article explores what it means for leaders of multigenerations to thrive together in partnership. They discuss the “elusive contest between the legacy of incumbent leaders and the potential of emerging leaders and ask us to consider mutual vulnerability as common ground.” They also summarize research on mentoring that looks at the gap between the numbers of emerging leaders who are mentored compared with the large numbers who desire mentors and ongoing relationships. The research follows up on earlier work on this topic explored in their books Leadership Divided and Bridging the Leadership Divide. Their article provides a personal case study demonstrating how generations can come together in partnership, thereby strengthening their organizations as well as the individuals involved. Perucci follows up on some of the themes highlighted by Carucci and Epperson as well as Mhatre and Conger and focuses on the way Millennials (Gen Y) are shaping organizations in the 21st century. Perucci reminds us that as we consider the implications of multiple generations working within the same organization, we must emphasize the crosscultural dimensions of intragenerational leadership. Globalization is reshaping leadership not only at the vertical level (multiple generations working side by side), but also horizontally (communication and technology reshaping the way Millennials interact across national boundaries). He suggests that just as leadership involves leaders, followers, and shared goals, successful leadership also requires an awareness of leading across cultures. He argues that effective leaders will be those who learn to work together “across boundaries in order to solve complex global problems.” Penney's article, “Voices of the Future: Leadership for the 21st Century,” focuses on both Generations X and Y (primarily X) and explores how those emerging leaders see leadership in the future and what kind of leaders they want to be. What leadership qualities/behaviors do they see as important? Themes of collaboration and inclusiveness are important to these emerging leaders, and they place high values on trust and integrity. Because they value inclusiveness, they work more easily across racial, ethnic, and gender differences and lines than did previous generations. The article also discusses what organizations need to do to attract and retain Generations X and Y. More flexible work arrangements are important as is having business organizations committed to corporate social responsibility and green initiatives. The findings come from the recent book Next Generation Leadership: Insights from Emerging Leaders (Penney & Neilson 2010). Tulgan and his colleagues at RainmakerThinking, Inc., have been conducting interviews with young people in the workplace for two decades. His article has a theme similar to Penney's in that he discusses ways to develop new leaders, primarily Generation Y. He addresses issues such as, how do we help them step into leadership roles successfully? He also addresses the question of why some of them are reluctant to take on supervisory roles. The article offers specific suggestions about ways to guide young professionals to prepare them for assuming leadership roles. He suggests that senior leaders should give frequent feedback to the top performers in Gen Y rather than leaving them on their own. He argues that too often we ignore high performers as we focus time and effort on the not‐so‐successful ones. According to Tulgan, more generous reward systems and hospitable work conditions are needed to retain high performers. In addition, he wants senior leaders to do more to help Gen Yers establish their credibility when they are given roles of increased responsibility. Conclusions There is a sense of optimism in play as you read these articles. Although there are differences found between Generations X and Y, overall the next generation of leaders also share some commonalities. They are more collaborative and inclusive than previous generations. And these emerging leaders are bringing a fresh approach to leadership and moving us away from the leader as “hero” or all‐knowing source of power and influence. Their desire for collaboration can help bridge the generation gap between Boomers and young professionals. Each brings particular strengths to their organizations, so as they work together, stronger institutions can be the result. Integrity is also important to emerging leaders, and authentic leadership behaviors hold much promise for strengthening our organizations. These emerging leaders can work well across cultures and are more comfortable with inclusion and diversity than those of previous generations. The authors provide several suggestions for working with and retaining young professionals so that their leadership skills are strengthened. Emerging leaders need support and honest feedback; they want reward systems that differentiate; they request flexible work arrangements. They also want to see corporate social responsibility in place in the business world. Emerging leaders of Generations X and Y are ready to assume leadership roles, but many do not want to lead as they have been led. We must do all we can as senior leaders, as academics, and as colleagues to prepare them for these responsibilities. As we pass the torch to a new generation of leaders, let's be certain they are well equipped for the task and ready to lead.     

A Citation-Based Ranking of Strategic Management Journals

Rankings of strategy journals are important for authors, readers, and promotion and tenure committees. We present several rankings, based either on the number of articles that cited the journal or the per article impact. Our analyses cover various periods between 1991 and 2006, for most of which the Strategic Management Journal was in first place and Journal of Economics & Management Strategy (JEMS) second, although JEMS ranked first in certain instances. Long Range Planning and Technology Analysis & Strategic Management also achieve a top position. Strategic Organization makes an impressive entry and achieves a top position in 2003–2006.