Collaboration network of knowledge creation and dissemination on Management research: ranking the leading institutions
- 602 Downloads
The aim of this paper is to measure the relevance of the institutions in the academic community involved in creating and disseminating knowledge in the field of Management through their position in the collaboration network. This relevance is defined by an original and more comprehensive approach to the analysis of each institution’s importance through degree centrality, as it includes scientific output, while at the same time taking into account the level of collaboration between institutions, as well as the impact of the publications in which each institution is involved. This approach enables us to draw up a ranking of the 103 leading institutions, as well as overcome some of the limitations of prior studies by considering the role each institution plays in the academic community, not only through its scientific output or citations but also through the relationships it forges with other institutions. Our findings confirm the existence of elite groups worldwide that collaborate with other minor institutions, whereas major institutions collaborate less with each other.
KeywordsAcademic collaboration Business schools rankings Research institutions Science indicators University policy
The authors thank three anonymous reviewers for their intuitive and insightful comments.
This paper has been supported by Projects ECO2012-36775 and ECO2015-67434-R of Spanish Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness (Spain) and Project 40101001 of the Universidad Católica del Norte (Chile).
- Adams, J., & King, K. (2009). Brazil research and collaboration in the new geography of science. Retrieved from USA: http://sciencewatch.com/sites/sw/files/sw-article/media/grr-brazil-Jun09.pdf
- Conroy, M. E., Dusansky, R., Drucker, D., & Kildegaard, A. (1995). The productivity of economics departaments in the U.S: Publication in the core journals. Journal of Economic Literature, 33(4), 1966–1970.Google Scholar
- Diamond, A. M. J. (1985). The money value of citations to single-authored and multiple-authored articles. Scientometrics, 8(5–6), 815–820.Google Scholar
- Frawley, W. J., Piatratetsky-Shapiro, G., & Matheus, C. J. (1992). Knowledge discovery in databases: An overview. AI Magazine, 13(3), 57–70.Google Scholar
- Gazda, E., & Quandt, C. O. (2010). Inter-institutional collaboration in research in Brazil: Trends in articles in the innovation management area. RAE Electronica, 9(2), 1–28.Google Scholar
- Hirsch, J. E. (2005). An index to quantify an individual’s scientific research output. Paper presented at the Proc Natl Acad Sci USA.Google Scholar
- Karami, A., Rowley, J., & Analoui, F. (2006). Research and knowledge building in management studies: An analysis of methodologial preferences. International Journal of Management, 23(1), 43–52.Google Scholar
- Lotka, A. J. (1926). The frecuency distribution of scientific productivity. Journal of the Academy of Sciences, 16, 317–323.Google Scholar
- Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Podsakoff, N. P., & Bachrach, D. G. (2008). Scholarly influence in the field of management: A bibliometric analysis of the determinants of university and author impact in the management literature in the past quarter century. Journal of Management, 34(4), 641–720.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Price, D. S. (1963). Little science, big science. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar