Search results

Scientific publishing has recently faced challenges in dealing with questionable (predatory and hijacked) journals. The presence of questionable journals in any field, including management science, will yield junk science. Although there are studies about questionable journals in other fields, these journals have not yet been examined in the field of business and management. This study aims to identify facilitators and barriers to dealing with questionable journals in management science.

A Delphi research method consisting of three rounds was used in this study. Data were collected from 12 experts in the first two rounds, and ten experts in the final round.

The present study shows that management science is vulnerable to questionable journals. A total of 18 barriers and eight facilitators to dealing with questionable journals in management science were found. The present study also identifies some new barriers and facilitators for avoiding questionable journals, which are specific to management science and have not been identified in previous research. Most of these barriers and facilitators were identified as “important” or “very important”. Publishers and scientific databases, government, the research community and universities and research centers were identified as critical players in overcoming challenges posed by questionable journals.

The number of articles that investigate predatory journals in management science is limited, and there is no research focused specifically on hijacked journals in this field. This study identifies facilitators and obstacles to dealing with predatory and hijacked journals in the field of management, by gathering opinions from experts. Thus it is the first study to examine hijacked journals in the field of management science. It is also one of the few studies that examine predatory and hijacked journals by conducting exploratory research rather than with a descriptive/conceptual approach.

Customer experience management (CXM), which aims to achieve and maintain customers' long-term loyalty, has attracted the attention of many organizations. Improving customer experience management in organizations requires that, first, their relevant capabilities be evaluated. The present study aimed to offer a set of key performance indicators for evaluating customer experience management in commercial banks.

The study, first, attempted to identify the components of evaluating customer experience management by reviewing the related literature and conducting interviews with experts. Then, the extracted components were transformed into assessable metrics using the goal question metric method, and the key performance indicators relevant to customer experience management in commercial banks were selected according to the experts' opinions and the Fuzzy Delphi method.

According to the findings of the study, 21 key performance indicators were identified for customer experience management in commercial banks, and customer satisfaction, the mean number of calls to resolve an issue in customer journey touchpoints, the NPS, and the ratio of the budget allocated to the CXM department to the budget of the marketing department were found as the most significant performance indicator according to banking experts.

The present study was among the first research projects intended to evaluate CXM and offer key performance indicators that could help the managers of commercial banks assess the maturity levels of their CXM.