Search results

This study aims to identify the causes of the academia-industry divide in hospitality marketing research in the form of the “Research Devaluation Map” and offers ideas for discussion points and suggestions for change.

The conceptualization of the Research Devaluation Map was developed at an invitational thought-leadership conference. The authors were asked to produce a forward looking, critical reflection of hospitality marketing scholarship. The authors generated a preliminary idea and developed a methodology for its implementation. They then proposed a framework that explicated the divide between hospitality marketing research and industry practice and a list of discussion points regarding possible solutions.

The issues currently challenging the hospitality research field are found to include the choice of research topics (the “what”), the methods used in research (the “how”) and the systemic factors that shape the academic culture (the “systemic”). These three factors lead to a mutual devaluation of the academic–industry relationship in hospitality marketing, causing a schism between research and industry practice.

The Research Devaluation Map serves as a springboard for future research studies, providing a framework for naming and operationalizing the antecedents and results of the divide between hospitality marketing research and practice.

This paper takes a holistic look at the gaps in current hospitality marketing research and puts forth a framework to explain the roots of these issues. While certain of these issues are known to both researchers and practitioners, the originality of this paper lies in the creation of the Research Devaluation Map that identifies the causes and results of the disconnect between research and practice.

Every business company deals with the dilemma of how much to invest in long-term (LT) versus short-term (ST) problem (LTvST problem). LT operations increase the reputation of the company, and revenue is rewarded in the future. In contrast, ST operations result in immediate rewards. Thus, every organization faces the dilemma of how much to invest in LT versus ST activities. The former deals with the “what” or effectiveness, and the latter deals with the “how” or efficiency. The role of managers is to solve this dilemma; however, they often fail to do so, mainly because of a lack of knowledge. This study aims to propose a dynamic optimal control model that formulates and solves the LTvST problem.

This study proposes a dynamic optimal control model that formulates and solves the dilemma whether to invest in short- or LT operations.

This model is illustrated as an example of an academic institute that wants to maximize its reputation. Investing in effectiveness in the academy translates into investing in research, whereas investing in efficiency translates into investing in teaching. Universities and colleges with a good reputation attract stronger candidates and benefit from higher tuition fees. Steady-state conditions and insightful observations were obtained by studying the optimal solution and performing a sensitivity analysis.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this paper is the first one to explore the optimal strategy when trying to maximize the short and LT activities of a company and solve the LTvST problem. Furthermore, it is applied on universities where teaching is the ST activity and research the LT activity. The insights gleaned from the application are relevant to many different fields. The authors believe that the paper makes a significant contribution to academic literature and to business managers.

This paper aims to examine whether the position of universities in the times higher education (THE) impact rankings (IR) is related to the different dimensions of academic quality of universities according to the THE world universities ranking.

The research, based on universities ranked in the top 100 of THE IRs, uses a regression model obtained by the panel data method, using the fixed effects approach, to identify the relationship of academic quality dimensions with that ranking.

The results show an increase in the dissemination of information on sustainable development goals (SDGs) by universities. In addition, it is shown that research, number of citations and international outlook are positively associated with a higher score obtained by universities in THE IRs, which implies a higher impact on the SDGs by these universities.

Based on multifaceted theories, the study highlighted the universities that are best positioned in the THE IRs in relation to their contribution to the SDGs.

This article explores whether six broad categories of activities undertaken by Canadian business scholars’ academics: publications record, citations record, teaching load, administrative load, consulting activities, and knowledge spillovers transfer, are complementary, substitute, or independent, as well as the conditions under which complementarities, substitution and independence among these activities are likely to occur.

A multivariate probit model is estimated to take into account that business scholars have to consider simultaneously whether or not to undertake many different academic activities. Metrics from Google Scholar of scholars from 35 Canadian business schools, augmented by a survey data on factors explaining the productivity and impact performances of these faculty members, are used to explain the heterogeneities between the determinants of these activities.

Overall, the results reveal that there are complementarities between publications and citations, publications and knowledge spillovers transfer, citations and consulting, and between consulting and knowledge spillovers transfer. The results also suggest that there are substitution effects between publications and teaching, publications and administrative load, citations and teaching load, and teaching load and administrative load. Moreover, results show that public and private funding, business schools’ reputation, scholar’s relational resources, and business school size are among the most influential variables on the scholar’s portfolio of activities.

This study considers simultaneously the scholar’s whole portfolio of activities. Moreover, the determinants considered in this study to explain scholars’ engagement in different activities reconcile two conflicting perspectives: (1) the traditional self-managed approach of academics, and (2) the outcomes-focused approach of university management.

The competition in the academe has always been tough, but today, the academe seems to be more like an industry than an academic community as academics are evaluated through quantified and economic means.

This article leans on Heidegger’s thoughts on the essence of technology and his ontological view on being to show the dangers that lie in this quantification of researchers and research.

Despite the benefits that information systems (ISs) offer to people and research, it seems that technology has made it possible to objectify researchers and research. This has a negative impact on the academe and should thus be looked into especially by the IS field, which should note the problems that exist in its core. This phenomenon of quantified academics is clearly visible at academic quantification sites, where academics are evaluated using metrics that count their output. It seems that the essence of technology has disturbed the way research is valued by emphasising its quantifiable aspects. The study claims that it is important to look for other ways to evaluate researchers rather than trying to maximise research production, which has led to the flooding of articles that few have the time or interest to read.

This paper offers new insights into the current phenomenon of quantification of academics and underlines the need for critical changes if in order to achieve the academic culture that is desirable for future academics.

This study aims to focus on key approaches to education for sustainability (EfS) leadership development in the context of Malaysian and Japanese universities. The authors identify key indicators of effective EfS leadership development approaches using both descriptive and inferential analyses, identify and compare the preferred leadership learning methods of academics and examine the impact of marital status, country of residence and administrative position on the three EfS leadership development approaches.

The study is quantitative in approach and survey in design. Data were collected from 664 academics and analysed using the efficient partial least squares (PLSe2) methodology. To provide higher education researchers with more analytical insights, the authors re-estimated the models based on the maximum likelihood methodology and compared the results across the two methods.

The inferential results underscored the significance of four EfS leadership learning methods, namely, “Involvement in professional leadership groups or associations, including those concerned with EfS”, “Being involved in a formal mentoring/coaching program”, “Completing formal leadership programs provided by my institution” and “Participating in higher education leadership seminars”. Additionally, the authors noted a significant impact of country of residence on the three approaches to EfS leadership development. Furthermore, although marital status emerged as a predictor for self-managed learning and formal leadership development (with little practical relevance), administrative position did not exhibit any influence on the three approaches.

In addition to the theoretical and methodological implications drawn from the findings, the authors emphasize a number of practical implications, namely, exploring the applicability of the results to other East Asian countries, the adaptation of current higher education leadership development programmes focused on the key challenges faced by successful leaders in similar roles, and the consideration of a range of independent variables including marital status, administrative position and country of residence in the formulation of policies related to EfS leadership development.

This study represents an inaugural international comparative analysis that specifically examines EfS leadership learning methods. The investigation uses the research approach and conceptual framework used in the international Turnaround Leadership for Sustainability in Higher Education initiative and uses the PLSe2 methodology to inferentially pinpoint key learning methods and test the formulated hypotheses.

This paper explores the Adoption of Technological Innovation (ATI) in the healthcare industry. It investigates how the literature has evolved, and what are the emerging innovation dimensions in the healthcare industry adoption studies.

We followed a mixed-method approach combining bibliometric methods and topic modeling, with 57 papers being deeply analyzed.

Our results identify three latent topics. The first one is related to the digitalization in healthcare with a specific focus on the COVID-19 pandemic. The second one groups up the word combinations dealing with the research models and their constructs. The third one refers to the healthcare systems/professionals and their resistance to ATI.

The study’s sample selection focused on scientific journals included in the Academic Journal Guide and in the FT Research Rank. However, the paper identifies trends that offer managerial insights for stakeholders in the healthcare industry.

ATI has the potential to revolutionize the health service delivery system and to decentralize services traditionally provided in hospitals or medical centers. All this would contribute to a reduction in waiting lists and the provision of proximity services.

The originality of the paper lies in the combination of two methods: bibliometric analysis and topic modeling. This approach allowed us to understand the ATI evolutions in the healthcare industry.

This study aims to analyze the effectiveness and efficiency of research-based community service programs in Indonesia that used government funds in 2017–2021.

The design of this research is a quantitative research method using a data envelopment analysis to evaluate 370 leading universities in Indonesia. Furthermore, six analytical models were considered to compare effectiveness and efficiency between universities. It involved two resource (budget and staff academic involved), three output (intellectual property, prototype and publication) and three outcome variables (economic impact, social impact and capacity building).

The findings showed that several universities are considered necessary, with great potential to increase output and outcome efficiency in community involvement. The study mapped and divided the position of 370 universities for additional information. The effectiveness aspect provides another perspective in assessing the performance of tertiary institutions in Indonesia and can be an option for evaluating research performance to improve the quality of output.

The authors use data from research and community service management information systems used, both the resources used and the results. Efficiency and effectiveness of 370 universities were compared in this study, including comparing their position on the previous assessment with the assessment of the results of this study. Approach to the concept of Mandl et al. (2008) regarding the relationship between input, output and outcome as the main component of the indicators, the authors apply to analyze efficiency and effectiveness.

This research aimed to examine the impact of input, process, output, productivity and outcome variables on university research performance and the indicators that represent them in order to improve academic quality and contribute to government policy.

The quantitative approach was used through a survey method that obtained samples using questionnaires from 150 leaders of research institutions and continued analysis using the structural equation modeling-partial least square (SEM-PLS) to test the developed model.

Except for the relationship between process and productivity variables, all variable relationships had a positive and significant effect. Furthermore, the input, process, output, productivity and outcome variables each include seven, twelve, four and ten indicators.

This study has several ramifications because it provides a clear policy input and advances science. As a prelude to developing research performance assessment tools that take into account variances in a tertiary institution, this research aids in the implementation of national policies for assessing research performance in postsecondary institutions.

To improve the accuracy of the information acquired, we conducted a survey among the heads of research units at various higher-ranking Indonesian universities, taking into consideration their skill and experience in leading research organizations and conducting research. Other than that, our belief in the originality of our manuscript is strengthened by the way we applied systems theory to construct a performance evaluation model that examines each contribution made by each system aspect.