How to derive consensus among various marketing journal rankings?

Despite the increasing popularity of journal rankings to evaluate the quality of research contributions, the individual rankings for journals that ranked below the top tier of publications usually feature only modest agreement. Attempts to merge rankings into meta-rankings suffer from some methodological issues, such as mixed measurement scales and incomplete data. This paper addresses the issue of how to construct suitable aggregates of individual journal rankings, using an optimization-based consensus ranking approach. The authors apply the proposed method to a subset of marketing-related journals from a list of collected journal rankings. Next, the paper studies the stability of the derived consensus solution, and the degeneration effects that occur when excluding journals and/or rankings. Finally, the authors investigate the similarities/dissimilarities of the consensus with a naive meta-ranking and with individual rankings. The results show that, even though journals are not uniformly ranked, one may derive a consensus ranking with considerably high agreement with the individual rankings.     

Perceptual Differences of Marketing Journals: A Worldwide Perspective

The practice of evaluating faculty and business schools based on their journal publications has increased the emphasis on research output in peer reviewed journals. Since journal standings are a frequently debated issue, this study seeks to examine the perceptual differences of journals between different segments of marketing academics. Based on a worldwide online survey, journals are assessed in terms of four subjective quality metrics: journal familiarity, average rank position, percent of respondents who classify a journal as top tier, and readership. It is demonstrated that an individual's geographic origin, research interests or journal affiliation can have a significant impact on journal rankings.     

Revisiting the standing of international business journals in the competitive landscape

Journal rankings are contentious, proliferating and bring about a significant change to research productivity and quality assessment. In this paper, we assess the quality and impact of International Business (IB) journals in relation to each other and management and business journals more broadly. In so doing, we overcome methodological limitations of previous journal rankings by adopting a novel approach that incorporates a worldwide meta-ranking. Its key advantage is the ability to look at the standing of journals both within and between subject-areas. Comparisons between subject areas are important because centralization of resource allocation decisions within institutions has ramifications for disciplines and staff involved. Results indicate that within the IB domain, JIBS continues to top the list, JWB has solidified its position and joined the upper tier of IB journals, the space below JIBS and JWB is increasingly contested, pointing to the emergence of a multi-tier set of “core” IB journals. In the wider competitive landscape of management and business journals, IB journals perform well in the upper tier, but there is a long tail of IB journals at the lower end of our meta-ranking.     

A citation analysis of selected marketing journals

Citation analysis is one method of assessing the quality of a journal in a discipline. Over eight thousand citations are analysed to determine the frequency of use of a selection of American and European marketing journals. The rankings demonstrate the pre-eminence of American journals; and an analysis of marketing citations by general business journals indicates that research published in marketing journals is having an impact on other business areas.     

Key institutions in business and management education research

The authors investigate institutional productivity in business and management education (BME) research based on the analysis of 4,464 articles published by 7,210 authors across 17 BME journals over a 10-year period, involving approximately 1,900 schools worldwide. Departing from traditional disciplinary silos, they examine the BME research field as a whole by including all traditional business disciplinary areas and producing two top 100 rankings, one based on raw number of author publications and the other based on weighted scores reflecting journal quality and coauthorship.     

Evaluating Journal Quality: Beyond “Expert” Journal Assessments in the IS Discipline

Assessing the relative stature of journals devoted to the information systems (IS) discipline is an important issue for IS scholars and those who evaluate them. Even though journal assessment results are often dubiously applied by those making hiring, promotion, and merit decisions, the fact that they are so often a major ingredient in these decisions demands that we understand underlying journal assessment processes. Beyond processes involving the opinions of various “experts,” we here examine how IS journals can be evaluated based on overt behaviors of crowds of IS scholars. These behaviors are revealed preferences, in contrast to stated preferences found in opinions. Two classes of objective journal assessments are studied: impact measures and power measures. Among the former, we find that so-called journal impact factors are problematic, rendering their meaningfulness in evaluating journal stature highly suspect. Another kind of impact measure, the H-index, is found to be a more straightforward way to gauge journal impact. Two power measures for assessing IS journal stature are examined: publishing intensity and publishing breadth. The stature of IS journals according to each of the impact measures and power measures is determined. A comparison of the results shows that a small group of four or five IS journals are repeatedly found at the top across multiple objective assessment approaches. To account for both the consumption and production of IS research, it is suggested that a combined use of impact and power measures be employed in exercises aimed at evaluating relative statures of journals devoted to IS research.     

Investigating Information Systems Research in Canada

This project reports on the state of Information Systems (IS) research in Canada by analyzing research output and impact of Canadian IS scholars appearing in the form of peer‐reviewed journal articles. Specifically, we (a) measured individual productivity and impact, (b) measured institutional productivity and impact, (c) listed journals in which these works have appeared, (d) identified the most influential articles, (e) developed a ranking of IS scholarly journals from a Canadian perspective, and (f) compared the obtained journal ranking with the global IS journal rankings. Based on the findings, it was concluded that the Canadian IS discipline exhibits signs of academic maturity. Copyright © 2011 ASAC. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Empirical regularity in academic research productivity patterns in marketing

In any academic discipline, published articles in their respective journals represent “production units” of scientific knowledge, and bibliometric distributions reflect the patterns in this productivity across authors or “producers”. We use a comprehensive data set from 11 leading marketing journals to examine whether there is any empirical regularity in the patterns of research productivity in the marketing literature. Our results present strong evidence that there is indeed a distinct empirical regularity. It is the so-called generalized Lotka's Law of patterns in scientific productivity: the number of authors publishing n papers is approximately 1/n^c of those publishing one paper. We find the empirically estimated value of the exponent c to be 2.05 for the overall bibliometric data across the leading marketing journals. For individual journals, the estimated values of c range from 2.15 to 2.83, with lower values indicating higher authorship concentration levels. We also find that variations in authorship concentration levels across journals and over time are driven by a journal's maturity, its topical focus, its attractiveness as a publication outlet, the characteristics of its review process, and the extent of author collaboration present in the journal. We discuss the general implications of our findings.     

A Ranking of the Most Productive Business Ethics Scholars: A Five-Year Study

This paper presents the results of a study that counted articles and the number of pages written on business ethics and published during the five-year period 1995–1999. Individual scholars were ranked on the basis of total articles and total pages published. Institutions were also ranked based on the number of pages and articles their scholars published in selected business ethics journals. This article is the first one to rank schools and individual scholars on the basis of research productivity in business ethics.     

Defining a forum for entrepreneurship scholars

This study defines a forum for entrepreneurship scholars by updating [MacMillan, I.C., 1993. The emerging forum for entrepreneurship scholars. J. Bus. Venturing 8, 377–381]. A three-stage process is used in which entrepreneurship scholars identify and subjectively rate journals as publication outlets for entrepreneurship research. 25 journals were rated “appropriate” or higher, including both generalist and entrepreneurship specialist journals, both academic and practitioner journals, and journals from multiple academic disciplines. Compared to the ten-year earlier survey, there is a strong increase in the ratings of specialist journals.     

Multi-criteria Group Decision-Making Method Based on Intuitionistic Interval Fuzzy Information

For problems in multi-criteria group decision-making (MCGDM), this paper defines intuitionistic interval numbers, and the operational laws and comparison method of it. Some intuitionistic interval information aggregation operators are proposed, such as intuitionistic interval weighted arithmetic averaging operator, intuitionistic interval weighted geometric averaging operator, intuitionistic interval ordered weighted averaging operator, intuitionistic interval heavy averaging operator and intuitionistic interval aggregating operator. Then, based on intuitionistic interval fuzzy information, a method is developed to handle the problems in MCGDM. In this method, by applying the knowledge level of the experts to the decision making problem, the model of maximizing comprehensive membership coefficient is constructed to determine the weights of decision makers. By calculating the distances to the ideal and negative ideal solutions, the comprehensive attribute values and the rank of the alternatives can be obtained. Finally, an example is provided to demonstrate the feasibility and effectiveness of the proposed method.     

Bibliometric analysis of the Journal of Consumer Studies and Home Economics, 1977–1983

Two questions formed the structure for examining the formal communication among researchers using the Journal of Consumer Studies and Home Economics (JCSHE) The first question pertained to the interrelationship between the literature published and cited in JCSHE. The second asked what impact the literature published in JCSHE had on authors publishing in other journals. By performing Bradford analysis using the 1,160 journal references cited by authors of 210 articles in the first seven volumes of JCSHE, 26 core journals were identified. JCSHE was ranked second because it was cited 54 times in 37 articles by 29 authors. Through citation analysis 17 citing articles published in 12 journals other than JCSHE were found. Seven of these 17 citing articles were published in other home economics journals.     

CSR Rating Agencies: What is Their Global Impact?

In the last two decades, there has been a pronounced growth of CSR rating agencies that assess corporations based on their social and environmental performance. This article investigates the impact of CSR ratings on the behavior of individual corporations. To what extent do corporations adjust their behavior based on how they rank? Our primary finding is that being dropped from a CSR ranking appears to do little to encourage firms to acknowledge and address problems related to their social and environmental performance. Specific rankings appear not to have a widespread effect of influencing firms to acknowledge negative CSR events and publicly present plans and actions to address them. Whether firms are well or poorly ranked, they appear to focus on and publicly discuss their “positive” CSR activities. We discuss the wider significance of these results as well as the overall significance of CSR rankings for a global economy.     

International business research: Trends and school rankings

Using 10 years of publication data (1995–2004) from four leading international business journals, we examine global patterns of international business research and school rankings. Although US institutions still lead in the international business research, non-US schools are making significant progress. Asian-Pacific and European schools are well represented among the schools that account for the most articles appearing in the four journals. International collaboration between scholars across the globe appears to enhance school ranking.     

Assessing the global productive efficiency of Chinese banks using the cross-efficiency interval and VIKOR

The banking industry plays an essential role in China's economic growth, and the assessment of bank efficiency has attracted increasing interest in the past two decades. Given that the data envelopment analysis cross-efficiency method can provide a more reliable reference set, a large number of studies targeting performance evaluation and its applications adopt this method. Few studies, however, address the issue of the non-uniqueness of weights in cross-efficiency evaluation. Whereas, this paper proposes a cross-efficiency interval considering all weighting schemes along with a VIKOR aggregate model to gauge the universal productive efficiency of 16 major Chinese commercial banks of China and rank them for the period of 2007–14. Specifically, we use the cross-efficiency interval to generate the global performance of each bank based on internal and external assessment while using VIKOR to compare the solution with the attitude index which ranks all of the banks. The results indicate that the cross-efficiency interval can provide more information than the traditional DEA model, that the banking system efficiency of China has been improved during the study period, especially for SOBs; that JSBs are more efficient compared with SOBs; and the efficiency gap narrowed during the study period.     

我国出口企业重要技能的识别及其排序

根据对我国东部经贸发达地区的800家外贸企业所进行的问卷调查,采用主成分分析法识别出8大类共56项重要出口技能,8大类技能包括国际金融、国际营销、国际贸易政策与规则、国际贸易物流、国际结算、国际贸易战略管理、国际贸易调研和国际贸易实务;通过计算均值和标准差,对88项出口技能按重要性进行了排序。实证研究发现,我国外贸企业认为对于成功出口最重要的技能是国际贸易政策与规则、国际结算和国际贸易调研类技能。总体上,我国外贸企业更重视基本的金融技能和战略管理技能;对于国际营销技能重要项目的整总体评价一般甚至有些偏低;同其他国家企业的情况相比,我国外贸企业对国际贸易物流和国际贸易实务技能的重视程度相对较低。     

A stochastic programming model to analyze ordinal preference data

Many marketing situations require analysis of ordinal preference data. Existing analysis methods include OLS, variations of the logit model and methods such as LINMAP. An alternative method is proposed that has the following features: 1) Tie rankings are allowed; 2) all rank order information is incorporated into the estimation — not just first preferences; 3) the procedure is formulated as a L.P. model, which is easily implemented with existing software; 4) statistical inference is supported by the underlying stochastic model; and 5) it supports estimation of individual and group preferences.     

Default Patterns in Seven EU Countries: A Random Forest Approach

This study uses the relatively new “random forest” (RF) approach, which is based on decision-tree analysis by combining the results of a large set of decision trees. RFs have so far been little used for default prediction but offer an interesting alternative to well-established default prediction techniques. Based on accounting data from 945,062 observed European firms from seven countries in 2010 and 1,019,312 firms in 2011, we provide evidence on the country-specific default patterns. Because of the strong imbalance of the data sets with regard to the solvency status, standard RF implementations have to be modified to allow the estimation of realistic default propensities. We find that by far most accurate out-of-sample default propensities can be obtained for Italy followed by Portugal and Spain and the least accurate for the UK and Finland. The debt ratio, rate of return on sales, dynamic gearing ratio, and the rate of return on assets are found to be the most important variables for default prediction. The variable importance rankings are rather country specific, pointing to heterogeneity in the default patterns across the countries studied.     

Towards a Strategic Model of Global Franchise Expansion

This paper develops the first global index of international franchise expansion that ranks countries according to their attractiveness to US-based franchise firms. A quantitative model combining insights from academic research and business practice generates a ranking of 143 potential expansion target countries according to their risk/opportunity profiles. The rankings suggest that countries with large markets and strong political and legal systems (large European countries, and Canada, Japan, and Australia) are the most attractive for US-based franchisors, while the small, unstable African countries are the least attractive. China (and the other BRIC countries—Brazil, Russia, India) though attractive from a market opportunity perspective, is nevertheless not highly ranked due to their significant risks and large cultural and geographic distances. This study reaffirms the importance of a strategic approach to international franchising decisions, underscores the importance of properly assessing the relative importance of key determinants in internationalization decisions, highlights the importance of a comprehensive and systematic assessment of the various risks in international franchising decisions, shows the usefulness of quantitative modeling in international franchising, and advocates the development of effective risk management methods in order to cope with rapid changes in the global marketplace.     

Journal and author impact metrics: An editorial

This editorial offers a few thoughts on making sense of journal and article impact metrics. The editorial advocates measures of journal productivity and author impact that go beyond the use of a single measure of journal impact factor. The editorial includes data on the ranking of business and finance journals by journal productivity-impact metrics as well as journal impact factor values that editors sometimes refer to in off-site “Meet the Editors” sessions. Members of tenure and promotion committees frequently refer to impact factors of the journals candidates' publications appear in. Such metrics sometimes are the primary rationale for hiring, promoting, and firing faculty candidates even though the metric dominating thinking is unrepresentative of most faculty candidates' scholarly impacts and is highly unrepresentative of the majority of articles in all academic journals. This editorial suggests the use of multiple metrics for evaluating journals and candidates scholarly contributions. The editorial demonstrates a proposal for using a weighted journal productivity-impact factor and the creation of formal templates for evaluating the impact of individual candidate's scholarly contributions.