Search results

This study explores the use and perceptions of scholarly journal ranking lists in the management field based on stakeholders’ lived experience.

The results are based on a survey of 463 active knowledge management and intellectual capital researchers.

Journal ranking lists have become an integral part of contemporary management academia: 33% and 37% of institutions and individual scholars employ journal ranking lists, respectively. The Australian Business Deans Council (ABDC) Journal Quality List and the UK Academic Journal Guide (AJG) by the Chartered Association of Business Schools (CABS) are the most frequently used national lists, and their influence has spread far beyond the national borders. Some institutions and individuals create their own journal rankings.

Management researchers employ journal ranking lists under two conditions: mandatory and voluntary. The forced mode of use is necessary to comply with institutional pressure that restrains the choice of target outlets. At the same time, researchers willingly consult ranking lists to advance their personal career, maximize their research exposure, learn about the relative standing of unfamiliar journals, and direct their students. Scholars, academic administrators, and policymakers should realize that journal ranking lists may serve as a useful tool when used appropriately, in particular when individuals themselves decide how and for what purpose to employ them to inform their research practices.

The findings reveal a journal ranking lists paradox: management researchers are aware of the limitations of ranking lists and their deleterious impact on scientific progress; however, they generally find journal ranking lists to be useful and employ them.

Research on green certificate rankings in the MENA region primarily focuses on building scale, relying on the certified project count. This assessment approach overlooks the spatial factor, failing to capture their influence on the urban built environment, thus potentially undermining other efforts not reflected by the project count. This research aims to rank countries in the Middle East and Northern Africa (MENA) region based on their ongoing efforts regarding green neighbourhood certification.

This study employs a three-phase methodology to rank MENA countries' adoption of green neighbourhood certification systems: content analysis, multicriteria analysis (MCA) using the analytical hierarchy process (AHP) and spatial analysis.

Based on the content analysis, four major performance indicators were identified and the conventional ranking using projects count was presented. Using AHP, the MCA could rank the countries in the region according to their unique performance indicators score, clarifying the differences between conventional and AHP-based rankings. Finally, the spatial analysis phase uncovers shortcomings in the traditional ranking method, revealing inaccuracies and misrepresentations for several countries.

The study presents an innovative ranking methodology to monitor the green neighbourhood actions of countries in future development and establish a pioneering framework to evaluate the impact of green certifications within the region.

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.

The study aims to investigate market reactions associated with the JUST 100 rankings published by JUST Capital, a non-profit organization, as well as differences in financial reporting quality and performance between selected firms and their industry peers.

This study uses a sample of 431 firms selected as the 100 America’s Most Just Companies between 2016 and 2020 by JUST Capital. This study performs both an event study to determine whether the rankings are useful to investors and cross-sectional regression analyses on the characteristics of selected firms compared to their peers.

This study finds that investors react positively to selected firms around the time of the release of the JUST 100 rankings, suggesting that the rankings are decision-useful. This study also finds that selected firms exhibit higher accounting quality and financial performance than their peers.

Rankings may not be free from bias because of JUST Capital’s ownership of an exchange-traded fund.

The findings validate the rankings as well as the methodology used by JUST Capital, as they show market participants value firms that engage in socially responsible actions through their commitment to positively impact five key stakeholder groups: employees, customers, communities, environment and shareholders.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this is the first study that shows the importance of the JUST 100 rankings for investment decisions. Considering the growing push for companies to disclose environmental, social and governance (ESG) activities, this study provides evidence to support ESG disclosure regulations.

The purpose of this research is to determine the competitive advantages of higher education institutions (HEIs) and create a new methodology to rank universities according to the competitive advantages.

The research determines the competitive advantages of HEIs by analysing expert opinions through a semi-structured interview form, matches codes and themes to performance indicators using Saldana's two-cycle coding methods, evaluates content validity through Lawshe and reveals the item weights of the ranking with analytical hierarchy process (AHP). Simple additive weighting (SAW) and Technique for Order of Preference by Similarity (TOPSIS) methods were used for ranking universities.

Seven dimensions stand out in regard to what should be considered while ranking HEIs: research and publication, education, management, infrastructure, financial resources, human resources and social and economic contribution. Under the 7 dimensions, 69 indicators were determined.

The research provides a scientific reference point where HEIs can compare themselves with other HEIs regarding where they are in the sector, especially in terms of competitive advantages.

Although there are many different ranking methods that rank universities in the national and international literature, almost all these methods are largely based on the outputs of the university such as the number of publications, the number of patents, the number of projects, etc. A framework which ranks universities by considering different aspects of the institution, such as management, human resources and financial resources, has not been developed yet. In this respect, this research aims to fill this gap in the literature.

Prospective students and other stakeholders in the education system use global and national rankings as a measure of the quality of education offered by different higher educational institutions. The ranking of an Institution is seen as a measure of reputation and has a significant role in attracting students. But are students happy in the top-ranked institutions? Does a high rank translate into high student satisfaction? This study answers this question taking data from top educational institutions in India.

This study examines how the top-ranked higher education institutions in India fare on student satisfaction. Using the data on key performance indicators published by the National Institutional Ranking Framework (NIRF) and student satisfaction scores of these institutions reported by NAAC, the study explores a possible relationship between the ranking of an institution and its student satisfaction score.

The study finds no significant relationship between the ranking of an institution and its student satisfaction score. The only institutional performance dimension which has a positive correlation with student satisfaction is graduate outcome. The diversity dimension is seen to be negatively correlated with student satisfaction.

The importance of modifying the ranking frameworks to account for the real drivers of student satisfaction is highlighted. The items in the student satisfaction survey should be regularly updated to reflect the actual concerns of the students. This is very important given the fact that the number of Indian students going abroad for higher education recorded a six-year high in 2022 at 750,365.

With more than 50,000 institutions catering to over 40 million students, India has the largest higher education system in the world. Given the high level of competition among these institutions, ranking and accreditation have become important parameters used by students for selection of an institution. But do top-ranked higher education institutions have the most satisfied student community? The assumption is disproved using the most credible secondary data. This study is the first of its kind in the Indian context. It has huge implications for the most respected ranking frameworks.

The purpose of this paper is to identify the differences in employer branding between the companies that participate and those that do not participate in employer ranking.

Quantitative data were collected through a survey from 188 companies operating on the Russian labour market. Descriptive statistics, frequency analysis, correlation analysis and multivariate analysis of variance were used to analyse the collected data.

The findings revealed specific profiles of the companies that participated and did not participate in employer ranking. Companies differed in their employer branding orientation, internal branding, employer branding strategy, employer branding programmes and employer branding communications tasks. At the same time, brand orientation did not differ between participants and non-participants of employer ranking.

This study integrates the employer brand equity theory and the signalling theory to better explain the differences between participants and non-participants of employer ranking.

For ranking aggregation in crowdsourcing task, the key issue is how to select the optimal working group with a given number of workers to optimize the performance of their aggregation. Performance prediction for ranking aggregation can solve this issue effectively. However, the performance prediction effect for ranking aggregation varies greatly due to the different influencing factors selected. Although questions on why and how data fusion methods perform well have been thoroughly discussed in the past, there is a lack of insight about how to select influencing factors to predict the performance and how much can be improved of.

In this paper, performance prediction of multivariable linear regression based on the optimal influencing factors for ranking aggregation in crowdsourcing task is studied. An influencing factor optimization selection method based on stepwise regression (IFOS-SR) is proposed to screen the optimal influencing factors. A working group selection model based on the optimal influencing factors is built to select the optimal working group with a given number of workers.

The proposed approach can identify the optimal influencing factors of ranking aggregation, predict the aggregation performance more accurately than the state-of-the-art methods and select the optimal working group with a given number of workers.

To find out under which condition data fusion method may lead to performance improvement for ranking aggregation in crowdsourcing task, the optimal influencing factors are identified by the IFOS-SR method. This paper presents an analysis of the behavior of the linear combination method and the CombSUM method based on the optimal influencing factors, and optimizes the task assignment with a given number of workers by the optimal working group selection method.

The built environment is a complex sector that demands coordination and cooperation of stakeholders. Construction projects from the complex sector require skills, services, and integration of major disciplines in the built environment. Sustainability of the major disciplines' standards regarding the appropriateness of the built environment tertiary education cannot be over-emphasised in Nigeria. Studies concerning Nigeria's built environment programmes accreditation (BEPA) in the 21st-century education system are scarce. Thus, the study investigated the relevance and perceived factors hindering Nigeria's BEPA in the 21st-century education system. Also, the study proffered measures to improve Nigerian built environment tertiary education accreditation ranking.

Data were sourced from elite virtual interviews across Nigeria. The interviewees were knowledgeable about Nigeria's built environment programmes accreditation, and many of them have been directly or indirectly involved. The investigators utilised a thematic analysis for the collated data and enhanced it with secondary sources.

The study revealed that several Nigerian academia in the built environment lack fame in research, publication, and citations due to barriers in their workplace. It has hindered their global institution's accreditation and ranking standards. Findings identified inadequate basic infrastructure, obsolete curricula, lack of research novelty, lack of higher education institutions funding, inadequate staffing and lax upskilling and reskilling, and unethical practices “systematic corruption” as major factors hindering BEPA. Also, findings proffered measures to improve Nigeria's BEPA global ranking.

The study is limited to the perceived barriers and measures to improve BEPA in the 21st-century in Nigeria via semi-structured virtual interviews. Future study is needed to validate the findings as highlighted in the thematic network.

The paper confirms that the BEPA requires innovative and multidisciplinary measures to improve the global ranking of these programmes and, by extension, the higher education institutions ranking globally. The paper would stir major stakeholders and advance the built environment programmes quality accreditation regarding international best practices and maintain the minimum standards.

The paper comprehensively analyses the perceived factors and proffered measures to improve Nigeria's BEPA in the 21st-century via a thematic network. The outcome intends to improve the global ranking and stir stakeholders to reposition and showcase Nigeria's built environment programmes to the world.

The primary purpose of this exploratory paper is to propose a novel analytical framework for examining corruption from a behavioral perspective by highlighting multiple issues associated with quantification culture.

This paper is part of the author’s exploratory study into the complex corruption phenomenon in Indonesia from a variety of viewpoints to obtain a better understanding of its nature and dynamics. By building on previous literature on quantification culture, audit culture and the corruption phenomenon, this paper explores the different issues related to overreliance on numbers and how they may have led to increased corruption, particularly in Indonesia. Using the Fraud Decision Scale framework, this paper also demonstrates how the quantification culture affects the cost-benefit analysis of corruption offenders. To develop the best anticorruption strategy and lay the groundwork for future anticorruption studies, this paper presents a fresh perspective on how to analyze and evaluate the corruption issue.

The author established that despite the benefits that quantification practices – such as indicators, scores, ratings and rankings – bring to societies and organizations, there is evidence that these practices can have unfavorable effects when used excessively or incorrectly. One of the adverse effects of quantification practices is over-quantification, which manifests as various inappropriate behaviors, including an excessive desire to acquire riches and material belongings. Additionally, the worship of ranks and status derived from quantitative evaluation processes has led many people to prioritize short-term objectives above long-term improvements. Eventually, these will cause organizations to lose productivity and make them susceptible to fraud and corruption. Future studies are needed to determine the most effective approach for mitigating over-quantification issues. In this exploratory paper, the author proposes balancing quantitative practices with qualitative knowledge to gradually alter people’s behavior by broadening their perspectives in perceiving various phenomena in the world, not only by describing and explaining them but also by comprehending their underlying meanings.

This exploratory study is self-funded and relies primarily on documentary analysis to explore the corruption phenomenon in Indonesia. Future studies will benefit from in-depth interviews with former corruption offenders and investigators.

This exploratory paper contributes to the development of a sound corruption prevention approach by presenting a novel analytical framework for examining various behavioral problems linked with quantification culture that may lead to the escalation of corruption.

This study emphasizes the significance of understanding the structure and dynamics of quantification culture and their negative behavioral impacts on people to comprehend the corruption phenomenon better.