Advanced Search
MyIDEAS: Login to save this article or follow this journal

Judging the quality of research in business schools: The UK as a case study


Author Info

  • Doyle, J. R.
  • Arthurs, A. J.
Registered author(s):


    This article examines how the research quality of management departments and business schools may be assessed. We define the most influential business and management studies journals by their 10-year citation impact. Most of these journals are based in the US. We examine the extent to which UK business schools publish in the most cited journals, and find a surprisingly small presence, even from those business schools classified as 'internationally excellent' by the most recent government-sponsored Research Assessment Exercise (RAE). Comparisons are made with US business schools. We then show that British academics publish mainly in British-based journals. Reasons for this situation and reactions to it are discussed.

    Download Info

    If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
    File URL:
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

    Bibliographic Info

    Article provided by Elsevier in its journal Omega.

    Volume (Year): 23 (1995)
    Issue (Month): 3 (June)
    Pages: 257-270

    as in new window
    Handle: RePEc:eee:jomega:v:23:y:1995:i:3:p:257-270

    Contact details of provider:
    Web page:

    Order Information:

    Related research

    Keywords: research evaluation citation analysis journal influence Research Assessment Exercise Business and Management Studies academic insularity;


    References listed on IDEAS
    Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
    as in new window
    1. Liebowitz, S J & Palmer, J P, 1984. "Assessing the Relative Impacts of Economic Journals," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 22(1), pages 77-88, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)


    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as in new window

    Cited by:
    1. Doyle, J. R. & Arthurs, A. J. & Mcaulay, L. & Osborne, P. G., 1996. "Citation as effortful voting: A reply to ones, Brinn and Pendlebury," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 24(5), pages 603-606, October.
    2. Jones, Michael John, 1999. "Critically evaluating an applications vs theory framework for research quality," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 27(3), pages 397-401, June.
    3. Mitchell, George, 1996. "Judging research quality and journals: A call for debate," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 24(5), pages 613-613, October.
    4. Holsapple, Clyde W. & Lee-Post, Anita, 2010. "Behavior-based analysis of knowledge dissemination channels in operations management," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 38(3-4), pages 167-178, June.
    5. Jones, M. J. & Brinn, T. & Pendlebury, M., 1996. "Judging the quality of research in business schools: A comment from accounting," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 24(5), pages 597-602, October.
    6. Jones, M. J. & Brinn, T. & Pendlebury, M., 1996. "Journal evaluation methodologies: A balanced response," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 24(5), pages 607-612, October.
    7. Donohue, Joan M. & Fox, Jeremy B., 2000. "A multi-method evaluation of journals in the decision and management sciences by US academics," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 28(1), pages 17-36, February.
    8. Doyle, J. R. & Arthurs, A. J. & Green, R. H. & McAulay, L. & Pitt, M. R. & Bottomley, P. A. & Evans, W., 1996. "The judge, the model of the judge, and the model of the judged as judge: Analyses of the UK 1992 research assessment exercise data for business and management studies," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 24(1), pages 13-28, February.
    9. Doyle, John R., 1999. "Evaluating OR/MS research," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 27(3), pages 403-405, June.
    10. Biehl, Markus & Kim, Henry & Wade, Michael, 2006. "Relationships among the academic business disciplines: a multi-method citation analysis," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 34(4), pages 359-371, August.
    11. Ormerod, R. J., 1997. "An observation on publication habits based on the analysis of MS/OR journals," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 25(5), pages 599-603, October.


    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.


    Access and download statistics


    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:jomega:v:23:y:1995:i:3:p:257-270. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Zhang, Lei).

    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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.