IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/zbw/umiodp/32013.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Soll man das Handelsblatt-Ranking BWL boykottieren?

Author

Listed:
  • Dilger, Alexander

Abstract

Das Handelsblatt-Ranking BWL erschien 2012 zum zweiten Mal und wurde von über 300 Wissenschaftlern boykottiert. Nach Vorstellung des Rankings und der wichtigsten Argumente für den Boykott werden wesentliche Diskussionsbeiträge zu dem Ranking und Boykott präsentiert und kommentiert. Dabei zeigt sich, dass insbesondere die geringe praktische Bedeutung dieses Rankings gegen seinen Boykott spricht, für den diese Bedeutung übertrieben und durch den sie sogar etwas gesteigert wurde. Folglich sollte man das Handelsblatt-Ranking BWL besser detailliert kritisieren oder ignorieren statt boykottieren.

Suggested Citation

  • Dilger, Alexander, 2013. "Soll man das Handelsblatt-Ranking BWL boykottieren?," Discussion Papers of the Institute for Organisational Economics 3/2013, University of Münster, Institute for Organisational Economics.
  • Handle: RePEc:zbw:umiodp:32013
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/72253/1/741293684.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Dilger, Alexander & Müller, Harry, 2011. "Ein Forschungsleistungsranking auf der Grundlage von Google Scholar," Discussion Papers of the Institute for Organisational Economics 12/2011, University of Münster, Institute for Organisational Economics.
    2. Dilger, Alexander, 2009. "Rankings von Zeitschriften und Personen in der BWL," IÖB-Diskussionspapiere 5/09, University of Münster, Institute for Economic Education.
    3. Dilger, Alexander, 2011. "Befragung der Kommission Hochschulmanagement zu VHB-JOURQUAL," Discussion Papers of the Institute for Organisational Economics 7/2011, University of Münster, Institute for Organisational Economics.
    4. Michael Berlemann & Justus Haucap, 2012. "Which Factors Drive the Decision to Boycott and Opt Out of Research Rankings?," CESifo Working Paper Series 3997, CESifo Group Munich.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • I23 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Education - - - Higher Education; Research Institutions
    • A11 - General Economics and Teaching - - General Economics - - - Role of Economics; Role of Economists
    • M00 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - General - - - General

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:zbw:umiodp:32013. 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: (ZBW - German National Library of Economics). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/ilmuede.html .

    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 CitEc recognized a reference but did not link an item in RePEc 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 RePEc Author Service 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.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.