Search results

The purpose of this study is to examine scholarly impact which is critical to universities in their aspiration to create, disseminate and apply knowledge. However, scholarly impact is an elusive concept. First, the authors present a conceptual model to clarify different dimensions of scholarly impact (i.e. theory and research, education, organizations and society) and four key stakeholders (i.e. other researchers, students, practitioners and policy makers). Second, the authors provide actionable recommendations for university administrators, researchers and educators on how to enhance impact. The scholarly impact model is flexible, expandable, scalable and adaptable to universities in different regions of the world and with different strategic priorities.

The authors conducted a general review of the literature and offered a multidimensional and multistakeholder model of scholarly impact to guide future actions aimed at enhancing scholarly impact.

The authors describe the multidimensional and multistakeholder nature of the critical and yet elusive concept of scholarly impact. The authors delineate multiple dimensions of impact, different stakeholders involved and recommendations for enhancing scholarly impact in the future.

The authors offer practical and actionable recommendations on how to enhance scholarly impact. For university administrators, the authors recommend aligning scholarly impact goals with actions and resource-allocation decisions; ensuring that performance management and reward systems are consistent with impact goals; being strategic in selecting a journal list; developing a strong doctoral program; and promoting practical knowledge and applications. For researchers and educators, the authors recommend developing a personal scholarly impact plan; becoming an academic decathlete; finding ways to affect multiple impact dimensions simultaneously; and leveraging social media to broaden impact on external stakeholders. Implementing these recommendations will benefit other researchers, students, practitioners (e.g. managers, consultants) and policy makers.

The authors provide an innovative way of conceptualizing scholarly impact. In turn, the conceptual analysis results in actionable recommendations for university administrators, researchers and educators to enhance impact.

The creation of positive social change (PSC) is considered the primary success criterion when evaluating social enterprise performance. However, despite a proliferation of PSC-measurements, their empirical validity and applicability in emerging economies remain largely unclear. The quantitative study examines the validity of the PSC-measurement approaches proposed by Bloom and Smith (2010; Bloom and Smith approach [BSA]) and Weaver (2020b; Weaver approach [WA]) in South Africa.

Investigating a representative sample of 347 social entrepreneurs from Gauteng and Limpopo provinces, the authors use questionnaire data to explore the factorial, convergent and discriminant validity of both PSC-measurement approaches. Statistically, this is done by applying factorial and correlation analyses.

The results yield acknowledgeable differences. BSA has a high factorial and convergent validity, while its discriminant validity remains doubtful. For WA, problems concerning factorial validity occur.

Despite limited generalizability, the authors provide a first guideline for scholars regarding the empirical validity of BSA and WA outside the context of developed economies.

The current study sheds light on the validity of two PSC-measurement approaches in an emerging economy context. This way, the authors contribute to the field by addressing the scarcity of empirical research and the restricted scope of developed economies regarding PSC-measurement.