Institutional Research Productivity Research Articles

ABC Model of Research Productivity and Higher Educational Institutional Ranking

Institutional Ranking has become a common practice in higher educational institutions, and business schools are the most benefitted by such ranking announced worldwide based on various ranking criteria. The ranking is usually based on pedagogy, placement, research output, faculty-student ratio, international linkage, management of technology etc. In this paper, based on six postulates, we have argued and analysed why the performance of higher educational institutions should be based on sole criteria of Institutional Research Performance (IRP). We have developed a model of measuring research productivity for higher educational institutions based on calculating institutional research index and weighted research index. The institutional research productivity is calculated using a metric which consists of three institutional variables and one parameter. The three variables identified are the following : Number of Articles published in peer reviewed journals (A), Number of Books published (B), and Number of Case studies and/or Book Chapters (C) published during a given time of observation. The parameter used is a number of full-time Faculty members (F) which remains constant during a given period of observation. A framework for institutional ranking based on institutional research productivity by considering calculated Institutional Research Index is also developed which can be used to give grades to higher educational institutions. Further, the model is tested by making use of case example of two best Business Schools from the USA and two best Business Schools from India. The value of research index and weighted research index are calculated for these institutions and observed variation of research productivity during last four years is also studied and discussed.

Understanding the relevance of national culture in international business research: a quantitative analysis

This review is a comprehensive quantitative analysis of the International Business literature whose focus is on national culture. The analysis relies on a broad range of bibliometric techniques as productivity rankings, citation analysis (individual and cumulative), study of collaborative research patterns, and analysis of the knowledge base. It provides insights on (1) faculty and institutional research productivity and performance; (2) articles, institutions, and scholars' influence in the contents of the field and its research agenda; and (3) national and international collaborative research trends. The study also explores the body of literature that has exerted the greatest impact on the researched set of selected articles.

Study on Research Productivity in World Top Business Schools

Institutional Ranking in higher educational institutions became common practice and business schools are highly benefitted by the announced worldwide ranks based on various ranking criterions. The ranking is usually announced based on pedagogy, placement, research output, faculty-student ratio, international linkage, management of technology etc. We have developed a model of calculating research productivity of higher educational institution based on calculating institutional research index and weighted research index. The institutional research productivity is calculated using a metric which consists of three institutional variables and one parameter. The three variables identified as the number of Articles published in peer reviewed journals (A), the number of Books published (B), and number of Case studies and/or Book Chapters (C) published during a given time of observation. The parameter used is the number of full-time Faculty members (F) in that higher education institution which remains constant during a given period of observation. In this paper, we have used ABC model of institutional research productivity to calculate annual research productivity of some of the world top business schools. The annual publication data for the year 2015 is collected from the respective institutional websites. The research productivity of these institutions are determined and compared. Based on research productivity index, and corrected research productivity index, the Business Schools are re-ranked. The parameters used in Financial Times (FT) Ranking system is compared with the features of ABC research productivity ranking model.

English

Bibliometric analysis of PubMed publications is aquantitative indicator for research productivity of scientific institutions. The current study aimed to quantitatively analyze and compare the research publications productivity of the Egyptian faculties of veterinary medicine published between 2000 and 2014 in PubMed-indexed journals. Egyptian faculties of veterinary medicine produced together 710 articles. According to their contributions to the total productivity, the 15 Egyptian faculties were ranked as follow; Cairo on the top followed by Assiut, Mansura, Zagazig, Alexandria, Benha, Suez Canal, Beni-Suef, Kafr El-Sheikh, South Valley, Menoufia, Damanhur, Sohag, Aswan and Minia.Cairo, Assiut and Mansura produced more than 52% of total publications, while Aswan and Minia had no publication contribution during the study period. The productivity of most faculties showed a fluctuation pattern (no specific pattern of an increase or decrease), however when the study years were grouped into periods of 5 years each, it was found that most of the faculties presented a progressive increase during the periods 2000 to 2004, 2005 to 2009 and 2010 to 2014. Most faculties have their publications with the first author affiliated to them. Authorship pattern analysis revealed that the multiple authorship trends were dominated over the single ones. Multiple-authored papers had two, three, four, five or more contributors. Department’s contributions were relatively diverse from faculty to another and some departments were not represented in faculty publications. In the current study, the PubMed research output of the faculties of veterinary medicine was quantitatively analyzed. The future study will focus on the qualitative analysis of the PubMed publications of these faculties using the journal impact factor and citation count. Key words: Bibliometric analysis, PubMed publications, veterinary medicine, Egypt

Modeling Research Competency of Faculty Member : A Preliminary Data

Research productivity of higher education institutions (HEIs) in Indonesia lags behind those in other countries in the region, that implicates their reputation. Because in aggregation, research productivity of HEI is the productivity of its faculty members, thus research competency of faculty members might be the factors that cause the low research productivity of those HEIs in Indonesia. Focusing on Faculty economics and Business, this paper aims to develop the model of research competency for faculty member. This paper show the analytical process used by author in modeling research competency using behavioral event interview (BEI). The preliminary data used in this paper consist of two subjects, the effective and outstanding performer, out of minimum seven respondents that have been targeted. The findings reveal that outstanding performer tend to show more people-focused behavior than task-focused behavior. It is consistent with the previous studies of competency modeling for professional / knowledge workers.

Role of Libraries in Research Productivity of Social Science Research Institutions: A Case Study

In India, research in Social Science dates back to the establishment of Universities across the country but the pace of research actually accelerated with the establishment of Indian Council for Social Science Research (ICSSR) in 1969. At present, research in Social Science is carried out in different categories of organizations such as specialized research institutions, Universities, Deemed to be Universities, Social Science departments in Institutes of National Importance such as IITs, IIMs etc. With a backdrop argument that libraries play a vital role in research output of social science research institutions, this paper tried to find out the use of libraries by researchers attached to two major social science research institutions in India, viz. the Gokhale Institute of Politics and Economics (GIPE) and Sardar Patel Institute of Economic and Social Research (SPIESR) by studying the extent of availability of resources in libraries of these two research institutions out of the total number of citations of the publications of the faculty members of these two institutions. It was found that the percentage of availability of cited resources is not encouraging in the libraries of these two institutions and the percentage of availability of cited resources by respective faculty members of these two institutions is more in SPIESR when compared with GIPE.

Ranking the research productivity of business and management institutions in Asia–Pacific region: empirical research in leading ABS journals

Ranking research productivity of institutions periodically is of a great necessity nowadays, for that can not only help understand the latest development level of related fields but also contribute to finding gaps and quickly improve. In previous studies, the number of publications and further impact factors of journals is two widely used indexes to measure research productivity. However, impact factors do not always tally with a quality of the journal, which will lead to a bias of research productivity. Given this, a new journal rating adjusted publications (JRAP) index is constructed in this paper, which is based on the journal rating of the ABS journal guide. It takes the quantity of publications and the quality of the publications into account at the same time. Compared with impact factors, academic journal guide can provide more authoritative and accurate measurement to the quality of journals. Experiments are conducted to rank Asia---Pacific institutions in business and management area based on JRAP, and it is the first time to rank Asia---Pacific institutions systematically. Ranking of institutions measured by three methods is also given. Compared the results obtained by three different rank methods, although institutions ranked in the top places keep the same, the specific rank differs. The results indicate that JRAP do prefer the institutions perform well in paper quantity and quality of journals.

Publication Productivity in the Supply Chain Management Discipline: 2011–13

AbstractThis article continues an established series of analyses across 48 years of institutional research productivity in supply chain management (SCM) journals, ranking the top 25 schools producing SCM research in 2011–13, in comparison to previous editions of the study. The current results illustrate that a core set of SCM academic institutions consistently retain strong research productivity, ranking in the top 10 across decades. However, there is significant variability in the remaining top 25 in comparison to previous editions, which is corroborated by an analysis of the concentration (i.e., diversity) of authors in the discipline that indicates that a greater number of authors and institutions continue to contribute SCM publications. However, this diversity is concentrated primarily among North American institutions as international institutions are not increasing publication productivity in the established journal set. Ultimately, the combined results provide a benchmark of the current status of the SCM discipline and present insights into its continued maturation.

Twenty-six years of operations management research (1985–2010): authorship patterns and research constituents in eleven top rated journals

This paper investigates the research contributions over a 26-year time frame (1985–2010) of academic institutions and individual authors to the field of operations management (OM). We use two measures, shared articles and distributed articles, to assess the research productivity of institutions as well as individual researchers. Further we assess the contribution of institutions based on affiliated author research as well as the research of their PhD graduates. In order to accomplish this, we utilise the published OM research articles in 11 top-rated and well-known academic journals over the time period from 1985 to 2010. In addition to the research, contributions of academic institutions and individual authors, we look at several bibliometric statistics related to this body of published research. These measures indicate that the research constituency is growing as evidenced by increasing numbers of researchers and institutions represented. Lastly, the collaboration between researchers appears to be increasing as evidenced by an increasing percentage of articles with three or more authors and the average number of authors per article published.

Assessing the Scientific Research Productivity of the Palestinian Higher Education Institutions

An-Najah National University (ANNU) is a Palestinian university that was established more than 35 years ago. The objective of this study was to do a bibliometric assessment of research output, which describes the growth, contribution, and impact of research carried out by the faculty members, researchers, or students of ANNU in the past 35 years. The data used for this study were retrieved from Scopus database. Bibliometric analysis was used to identify the pattern of publication, relative growth rate, authorship pattern, collaborative measures, author’s productivity, most prolific authors, and most prolific journals. A total of 791 published documents were retrieved for ANNU. Seventeen documents (2.1%) were published in Acta Crystallographica Section E Structure Reports Online, whereas 16 (2.0%) were published in Journal of Environmental Science and Health, Part A: Environmental Science and Engineering, and 10 (1.3%) were published in International Journal of Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics. Six hundred one (76%) documents were published in journals listed in Web of Knowledge. The total number of citations for documents published from ANNU, at the time of data analysis (November 19, 2013), was 4,553, with an average of 5.8 citations per document. The study identified 384 (25.8%) documents with 59 countries as ANNU–foreign collaborators. Research output from ANNU showed steady growth over the past 35 years. Research output was high from certain scientific disciplines, whereas was lagging from others. Future emphasis on joint research, international collaboration, and publishing in indexed journals is needed.

Changing Institutional Research Productivity of United States’ Science Education Programs: 2000s v. 1990s

The purpose of this study was to identify the major science education programs in the United States, where the science education researchers published their research during the first decade of the twenty-first century. This research study of the scholarly productivity of science education programs at United States’ institutions of higher education is compared with the last decade of 1990s (Barrow, Settlage, & Germann, 2008). Each issue of the eight research journals (Journal of Research is Science Teaching, Science Education, International Journal of Science Education, Journal of Science Teacher Education, School Science and Mathematics, Journal of Computers in Math and Science Teaching, Journal of Science Education and Technology, and Journal of Elementary Science Education) published in the 2000s provided the author(s) and their institutional affiliation. The resultant ranking of raw and weighted counts for the top 30 U.S science educations programs shows variation in journals where research was published. There were almost 50% of the 2000s top 30 institutions which were not listed for the 1990s. Potential explanations for variations and uses for ranking are discussed.

Publication Productivity of Faculty of Medicine, Mansoura University Indexed in PubMed.

Background:Analysis of PubMed publications as an indicator of the research productivity of individual countries, regions, or institutions has recently become a field of interest.Aim:The aim was to assess the past trends in PubMed-indexed medical publications from Mansoura Faculty of Medicine and to have an idea about the current situation in medical research.Materials and Methods:PubMed was searched for publications affiliated to Mansoura from the end of the calendar year 2012 and earlier.Results:Of 2798 papers related to Mansoura, 1756 publications were included in the analysis, and 1042 publications were excluded (false positives). The highest number of publications was in 2011 (10.6%, 187/1756) followed by 2012 (10.2%, 179/1756). There was an increase of the publication rate over 5-years period until it reaches 47.0% (826/1756) during the period from 2008 to 2012. The main high-producing department was Urology and Nephrology, which accounted for 35.9% (631/1756) of the total publications followed by Pediatrics and Parasitology. The median number of authors participated in the researches was four ranging from 1 to 23. Most of the publications were in the form of intervention/clinical trials (38.4%, 662/1756) followed by descriptive/cross-sectional study (38.3%, 659/1756). The median of the impact factor was 1.99 ranging from 0.27 to 53.3.Conclusion:The publication productivity of Mansoura Faculty of Medicine showed fluctuating pattern from the end of the calendar year 2012 and earlier. Future prospects for increasing research productivity should be considered to increase the number and quality of publications and academic staff participating in high-quality international researches.

Measuring institutional research productivity for the life sciences: the importance of accounting for the order of authors in the byline

Accurate measurement of institutional research productivity should account for the real contribution of the research staff to the output produced in collaboration with other organizations. In the framework of bibliometric measurement, this implies accounting for both the number of co-authors and each individual’s real contribution to scientific publications. Common practice in the life sciences is to indicate such contribution through the order of author names in the byline. In this work, we measure the distortion introduced to university-level bibliometric productivity rankings when the number of co-authors or their position in the byline is ignored. The field of observation consists of all Italian universities active in the life sciences (Biology and Medicine). The analysis is based on the research output of the university staff over the period 2004–2008. Based on the results, we recommend against the use of bibliometric indicators that ignore co-authorship and real contribution of each author to research outputs.

U.S. Institutional Research Productivity in Major Science Education Research Journals: Top 30 for 2000’s

VonAalst (2010) used Google Scholar to identify the top four science education research journals: Journal ofResearch in Science Teaching, Science Education, International Journal of Science Education, and Journal ofScience Teacher Education. U.S. institutional productivity for 2000-2009 for the above journals was the data forthe study. The major domestic science education programs were identified for raw and weighted counts. For thetop 10, there was a 100% agreement with different ranks while there was only a 60% agreement among thebottom 10. These results demonstrated that dominant science education faculty published their research inmultiple empirical journals.

DEA model for assessment of institutional research productivity in Poland

The objective of the article is to present the model concept of measuring productivity in Polish research units through DEA method. It describes the instrument to support management of a research funding allocation by the Polish ministry.

Contributions to financial crisis research: an assessment of the literature in Social Science Citation Index journals from 1990 to 2008

Research in the field of financial crisis has generated a considerable amount of literature in the past, yet there has neither been any study to assess the contributions to the literature made by individuals or institutions, nor any to measure the impact of the articles and researchers. This study represents an attempt to: (1) investigate the major journals in publishing financial crisis research, (2) assess the contributions of individual researchers and institutions using the credited contribution approach and (3) measure the impact of individual publications and individual researchers on the financial crisis literature through citation analysis, based on the publications in Social Science Citation Index (SSCI) journals from 1990 to 2008. The findings provide a useful benchmark for assessing individual and institutional research productivity, and trends for future research and venues for publications are identified.

Assessment of publication output in the field of general practice and family medicine and by general practitioners and general practice institutions

The discipline of family medicine (FM) lacks a comprehensive methodology, which can be applied as a standard for assessing overall research output in both the field of FM and by general practitioners (GPs)/general practice institutions. It was the aim of this study to develop a sensitive search strategy for assessing publication output in the field of FM independent of the author's profession or affiliation and by GPs/general practice institutions independent of their field of scientific interest. Literature searches limited to the year 2005 were conducted in PubMed and ISI Web of Sciences (ISI WoS). In PubMed, all relevant MeSH terms were used. Search terms possibly contained in the author's affiliations have been collected. In ISI WoS, the same entry terms including their abbreviations and plural forms were applied. The final queries were validated by manual review and matching results with selected FM journals. A comprehensive list of combined search terms could be defined. For the field of general practice/FM more publications could be retrieved in PubMed. Almost twice as many publications by GPs/general practice institutions could be retrieved in ISI WoS, where--in contrast to PubMed--the affiliation is documented for all authors. To quantitatively assess publication output in the field of FM, PubMed was identified as the preferable database. To assess publication output by GPs/general practice institutions, the ISI WoS is recommended as the preferable database. Apparently, the ISI WoS is more suitable to compare the research productivity of different countries, authors or institutions.

Research Productivity in Select Psychology Journals, 1986–2008

ABSTRACT Examination of research productivity has a long history in psychology. Journals across psychology have periodically published research-productivity studies. An analysis of institutional research productivity was conducted for 17 journals published by the American Psychological Association for the years 1986–2008. This analysis implemented two methodologies: one a replication and extension of G. S. Howard, D. A. Cole, and S. E. Maxwell's (1987) method, the other a new method designed to give credit to psychology departments rather than only overall institutions. A system of proportional credit assured all articles with multiple institutions received credit. Results show that for the 23-year period, the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign was ranked 1st, followed by the University of California, Los Angeles, and the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. Overall, results showed both consistency and change across all journals examined. The authors explore the implications of these findings in the context of the current academic environment.

Assessing the Scientific Research Productivity of a Brazilian Healthcare Institution: A Case Study at the Heart Institute of São Paulo, Brazil

INTRODUCTION:The present study was motivated by the need to systematically assess the research productivity of the Heart Institute (InCor), Medical School of the University of São Paulo, Brazil.OBJECTIVE:To explore methodology for the assessment of institutional scientific research productivity.MATERIALS AND METHODS:Bibliometric indicators based on searches for author affiliation of original scientific articles or reviews published in journals indexed in the databases Web of Science, MEDLINE, EMBASE, LILACS and SciELO from January 2000 to December 2003 were used in this study. The retrieved records were analyzed according to the index parameters of the journals and modes of access. The number of citations was used to calculate the institutional impact factor.RESULTS:Out of 1253 records retrieved from the five databases, 604 original articles and reviews were analyzed; of these, 246 (41%) articles were published in national journals and 221 (90%) of those were in journals with free online access through SciELO or their own websites. Of the 358 articles published in international journals, 333 (93%) had controlled online access and 223 (67%) were available through the Capes Portal of Journals. The average impact of each article for InCor was 2.224 in the period studied.CONCLUSION:A simple and practical methodology to evaluate the scientific production of health research institutions includes searches in the LILACS database for national journals and in MEDLINE and the Web of Science for international journals. The institutional impact factor of articles indexed in the Web of Science may serve as a measure by which to assess and review the scientific productivity of a research institution.

The Global and Regional Dispersion of Publishing in the Field of International Marketing

ABSTRACT This paper empirically examines the research productivity of academic institutions in the leading international marketing journals, leading generalist marketing journals, and leading international business journals between the years 1999 and 2003 from a regional and country-specific perspective. The research found that across the three groups of journals, the majority of works were authored by academics at institutions located in North America, although North Americans contribute significantly less in the international marketing and international business journals than leading generalist marketing journals. The findings suggest that there is a broadening of non-U.S. influence within the international marketing and international business journals, which should lead to a broadening of international marketing theory.