IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this article

Knowledge dissemination in operations management: Published perceptions versus academic reality

Listed author(s):
  • Meredith, Jack R.
  • Steward, Michelle D.
  • Lewis, Bruce R.
Registered author(s):

    The channels for knowledge generation and dissemination in the business disciplines are many: presenting research at conferences, writing books, distributing working papers, offering insights in society newsletters, giving invited talks, publishing studies in academic journals, and many other venues, including even blogs and perhaps Facebook®. But the most important venue is probably published research in "top-level" academic journals. In the discipline of Operations Management, many studies and lists have been published that attempt to determine which of these journals are supposedly the "top" according to either citation analyses, the opinion of recognized experts, author affiliations, bibliometric studies, and other approaches. These lists may then, in turn, be used in different degrees to evaluate research. However, what really counts is what the academic institutions actually use for guidance in evaluating faculty research. Based on a new source of ranking data from AACSB-accredited schools, we compare published journal-ranking studies against that of academe to determine the degree to which the studies reflect academic "reality". We present rankings of OM journals based on this new source of data and on an aggregate of the stream of published studies, and evaluate their consistency.

    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.

    Article provided by Elsevier in its journal Omega.

    Volume (Year): 39 (2011)
    Issue (Month): 4 (August)
    Pages: 435-446

    in new window

    Handle: RePEc:eee:jomega:v:39:y:2011:i:4:p:435-446
    Contact details of provider: Web page:

    Order Information: Postal:

    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.:

    in new window

    1. 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.
    2. Goh, C. H. & Holsapple, C. W. & Johnson, L. E. & Tanner, J., 1996. "An empirical assessment of influences on POM research," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 24(3), pages 337-345, June.
    3. Lee Cronbach, 1951. "Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 16(3), pages 297-334, September.
    4. Muller-Merbach, Heiner, 2011. "OR of the people, by the people, for the people," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 39(2), pages 119-119, April.
    5. Muller-Merbach, Heiner, 2011. "Five notions of OR/MS problems," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 39(1), pages 1-2, January.
    6. Michael F. Gorman & John J. Kanet, 2005. "Evaluating Operations Management--Related Journals via the Author Affiliation Index," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 7(1), pages 3-19, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

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

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:jomega:v:39:y:2011:i:4:p:435-446. 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: (Dana Niculescu)

    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.

    This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.