Global and national visibility of management research methodology scholars – the case of Poland
Abstract
Developing research methodology contributes to better management research outputs, links better management theory to business practice, as well as enriches the academic training received by the students at universities. Researchers might be tempted to provide generalizations on management research methodology based on global bibliographic databases, such as Scopus and Web of Science, and draw conclusions on the possible educational outline. However, since students are educated mainly in national languages, the literature in these languages might gain priority over more internationally recognized publications available only in English. Then, the question arises if scholars who might be recognized globally due to their presence in large, international bibliographic databases retain their visibility and influence at the national level. We conduct a comparative bibliometric study using Scopus, Web of Science, and BazEkon to answer this question. Our research reveals that for the case of Poland, information and social networks of management methodology scholars do not support the assumption of direct visibility of such global scholars at the national level, thus putting into question the reliability of global bibliographic databases to study management at the national level.
Keyword : management research methodology, bibliometric review, custom bibliographic databases, country level bibliometrics, management education
How to Cite
Kosch, O., Szarucki, M., & Skačkauskienė, I. (2023). Global and national visibility of management research methodology scholars – the case of Poland. Business: Theory and Practice, 24(1), 227–238. https://doi.org/10.3846/btp.2023.18655
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
References
Adams, R. J., Smart, P., & Huff, A. S. (2017). Shades of Grey: Guidelines for working with the Grey literature in systematic reviews for management and organizational studies. International Journal of Management Reviews, 19(4), 432–454. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijmr.12102
Arbnor, I., & Bjerke, B. (2008). Methodology for creating business knowledge. SAGE Publications. https://doi.org/10.4135/9780857024473
Archambault, É., Vignola-Gagné, É., Côté, G., Larivière, V., & Gingrasb, Y. (2006). Benchmarking scientific output in the social sciences and humanities: The limits of existing databases. Scientometrics, 68(3), 329–342. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-006-0115-z
Aria, M., & Cuccurullo, C. (2017). Bibliometrix: An R-tool for comprehensive science mapping analysis. Journal of Informetrics, 11(4), 959–975. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2017.08.007
Baas, J., Schotten, M., Plume, A., Côté, G., & Karimi, R. (2020). Scopus as a curated, high-quality bibliometric data source for academic research in quantitative science studies. Quantitative Science Studies, 1(1), 377–386. https://doi.org/10.1162/qss_a_00019
BazEkon (n.d.). BazEkon database. Retrieved January 15, 2023, from https://bazekon.uek.krakow.pl
Birkle, C., Pendlebury, D. A., Schnell, J., & Adams, J. (2020). Web of Science as a data source for research on scientific and scholarly activity. Quantitative Science Studies, 1(1), 363–376. https://doi.org/10.1162/qss_a_00018
Bracio, K., & Szarucki, M. (2019). Commercialization of innovations through internationalization: A systematic literature review. Business: Theory and Practice, 20, 417–431. https://doi.org/10.3846/btp.2019.39
Bramer, W. M., Rethlefsen, M. L., Kleijnen, J., & Franco, O. H. (2017). Optimal database combinations for literature searches in systematic reviews: A prospective exploratory study. Systematic Reviews, 6(245). https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-017-0644-y
Breslin, D., & Bailey, K. (2020). Expanding the conversation through ‘Debate Essays’ and ‘Review Methodology’ papers. International Journal of Management Reviews, 22(3), 219–221. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijmr.12234
Breslin, D., & Gatrell, C. (2020). Theorizing through literature reviews: The miner-prospector continuum. Organizational Research Methods, 26(1), 1–29. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428120943288
Cowhitt, T., & Cutts, A. (2020). Using network analysis to compare bibliographic database journal coverage. Journal of Electronic Resources Librarianship, 32(3), 195–210. https://doi.org/10.1080/1941126X.2020.1790952
De Moya-Anegón, F., Chinchilla-Rodríguez, Z., Vargas-Quesada, B., Corera-Álvarez, E., Muñoz-Fernández, F. J., González-Molina, A., & Herrero-Solana, V. (2007). Coverage analysis of Scopus: A journal metric approach. Scientometrics, 73(1), 53–78. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-007-1681-4
Donthu, N., Kumar, S., Mukherjee, D., Pandey, N., & Lim, W. M. (2021). How to conduct a bibliometric analysis: An overview and guidelines. Journal of Business Research, 133, 285–296. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2021.04.070
Duncan, G. T. (1993). Management research methodology: Prospects and links to practice. The International Journal of Organizational Analysis, 1(3), 255–272. https://doi.org/10.1108/eb028791
Dźwigoł, H. (2021). Factors affecting the quality of research process. Zeszyty Naukowe. Organizacja i Zarządzanie / Politechnika Śląska, 151, 173–188. https://doi.org/10.9734/bpi/mono/978-93-91882-00-6/CH2
Engels, T. C. E., Istenič Starčič, A., Kulczycki, E., Pölönen, J., & Sivertsen, G. (2018). Are book publications disappearing from scholarly communication in the social sciences and humanities? Aslib Journal of Information Management, 70(6), 592–607. https://doi.org/10.1108/AJIM-05-2018-0127
Gulati, R. (2007). Tent poles, tribalism, and boundary spanning: The rigor-relevance debate in management research. Academy of Management Journal, 50(4), 775–782. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2007.26279170
Haupt, J. P. (2022). Short-term internationally mobile academics and their research collaborations upon return: Insights from the fulbright U.S. scholar program. Journal of Studies in International Education, 26(4), 511–530. https://doi.org/10.1177/1028315321990760
Hernández-Torrano, D., Karabassova, L., Izekenova, Z., & Courtney, M. G. R. (2021). Mapping education research in post-Soviet countries: A bibliometric analysis. International Journal of Educational Development, 87, 102502. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijedudev.2021.102502
Koontz, H. (1961). The management theory jungle. Academy of Management Journal, 4(3), 174–188. https://doi.org/10.5465/254541
Koontz, H. (1980). The management theory jungle revisited. Academy of Management Review, 5(2), 175–188. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1980.4288715
Kosch, O., & Szarucki, M. (2020). Transatlantic affiliations of scientific collaboration in strategic management: A quarter-century of bibliometric evidence. Journal of Business Economics and Management, 21(3), 627–646. https://doi.org/10.3846/jbem.2020.12395
Kosch, O., & Szarucki, M. (2021a). A model for custom bibliographic databases creation: Machine learning approach for analogue documents inclusion. In The Proceedings of the 18th International Conference of Scientometrics & Informetrics (pp. 573–584). ISSI. https://www.issi-society.org/proceedings/issi_2021/Proceedings%20ISSI%202021.pdf
Kosch, O., & Szarucki, M. (2021b). An overview of 25 years of european scientific collaboration in the field of strategic management: A bibliometric analysis. European Management Review, 18(1), 51–69. https://doi.org/10.1111/emre.12401
Kowal, M., Sorokowski, P., Kulczycki, E., & Żelaźniewicz, A. (2022). The impact of geographical bias when judging scientific studies. Scientometrics, 127(1), 265–273. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-021-04176-7
Krupa, M. (2006). „Dżungla“ teorii organizacji i zarządzania – poznanie zdeterminowane pytaniem o światopogląd? Annales. Etyka w Życiu Gospodarczym, 9(1), 339–349.
Kwiek, M. (2016). The European research elite: A cross-national study of highly productive academics in 11 countries. Higher Education, 71(3), 379–397. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-015-9910-x
Lemak, D. J. (2004). Leading students through the management theory jungle by following the path of the seminal theorists: A paradigmatic approach. Management Decision, 42(10), 1309–1325. https://doi.org/10.1108/00251740410568999
Linkov, V., O’Doherty, K., Choi, E., & Han, G. (2021). Linguistic diversity index: A scientometric measure to enhance the relevance of small and minority group languages. SAGE Open, 11(2). https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440211009191
Lisiński, M. (2016). Paradygmaty metodologiczne nauk o zarządzaniu. Prace Naukowe Uniwersytetu Ekonomicznego We Wroclawiu, 421, 375–385.
Moed, H. F., De Moya-Anegon, F., Guerrero-Bote, V., & Lopez-Illescas, C. (2020). Are nationally oriented journals indexed in Scopus becoming more international? The effect of publication language and access modality. Journal of Informetrics, 14(2), 101011. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2020.101011
Newman, M. E. J. (2003). The structure and function of complex networks. SIAM Review, 45(2), 167–256. https://doi.org/10.1137/S003614450342480
Page, M. J., McKenzie, J. E., Bossuyt, P. M., Boutron, I., Hoffmann, T. C., Mulrow, C. D., Shamseer, L., Tetzlaff, J. M., Akl, E. A., Brennan, S. E., Chou, R., Glanville, J., Grimshaw, J. M., Hróbjartsson, A., Lalu, M. M., Li, T., Loder, E. W., Mayo-Wilson, E., McDonald, S., … & Moher, D. (2021). The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. The BMJ, 372. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n71
Pineda, P., Gregorutti, G., & Streitwieser, B. (2020). Emerging decolonialized research collaboration: The max planck society and the Leibniz association in Latin America. Journal of Studies in International Education, 24(1), 59–78. https://doi.org/10.1177/1028315319888891
Rousseau, D. M., Manning, J., & Denyer, D. (2008). Evidence in management and organizational science: Assembling the field’s full weight of scientific knowledge through syntheses. The Academy of Management Annals, 2(1), 475–515. https://doi.org/10.1080/19416520802211651
Rousseau, S., & Rousseau, R. (2021). Bibliometric techniques and their use in business and economics research. Journal of Economic Surveys, 35(5), 1428–1451. https://doi.org/10.1111/joes.12415
Rybnicek, R., & Königsgruber, R. (2019). What makes industry–university collaboration succeed? A systematic review of the literature. Journal of Business Economics, 89(2), 221–250. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11573-018-0916-6
Samulevičius, J. (2012). Collaboration of business and science: A starting position for Lithuania’s move to radical economic change. Business: Theory and Practice, 13(3), 187–196. https://doi.org/10.3846/btp.2012.20
Sułkowski, Ł. (2016). Teorie, paradygmaty, metafory i ideologie zarządzania – kontrowersje wokół współczesnego dyskursu organizacji i zarządzania. Prace Naukowe Uniwersytetu Ekonomicznego We Wrocławiu, 422, 131–143.
Tunger, D., & Eulerich, M. (2018). Bibliometric analysis of corporate governance research in German-speaking countries: Applying bibliometrics to business research using a custom-made database. Scientometrics, 117(3), 2041–2059. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-018-2919-z
Zupic, I., & Čater, T. (2015). Bibliometric methods in management and organization. Organizational Research Methods, 18(3), 429–472. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428114562629
Arbnor, I., & Bjerke, B. (2008). Methodology for creating business knowledge. SAGE Publications. https://doi.org/10.4135/9780857024473
Archambault, É., Vignola-Gagné, É., Côté, G., Larivière, V., & Gingrasb, Y. (2006). Benchmarking scientific output in the social sciences and humanities: The limits of existing databases. Scientometrics, 68(3), 329–342. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-006-0115-z
Aria, M., & Cuccurullo, C. (2017). Bibliometrix: An R-tool for comprehensive science mapping analysis. Journal of Informetrics, 11(4), 959–975. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2017.08.007
Baas, J., Schotten, M., Plume, A., Côté, G., & Karimi, R. (2020). Scopus as a curated, high-quality bibliometric data source for academic research in quantitative science studies. Quantitative Science Studies, 1(1), 377–386. https://doi.org/10.1162/qss_a_00019
BazEkon (n.d.). BazEkon database. Retrieved January 15, 2023, from https://bazekon.uek.krakow.pl
Birkle, C., Pendlebury, D. A., Schnell, J., & Adams, J. (2020). Web of Science as a data source for research on scientific and scholarly activity. Quantitative Science Studies, 1(1), 363–376. https://doi.org/10.1162/qss_a_00018
Bracio, K., & Szarucki, M. (2019). Commercialization of innovations through internationalization: A systematic literature review. Business: Theory and Practice, 20, 417–431. https://doi.org/10.3846/btp.2019.39
Bramer, W. M., Rethlefsen, M. L., Kleijnen, J., & Franco, O. H. (2017). Optimal database combinations for literature searches in systematic reviews: A prospective exploratory study. Systematic Reviews, 6(245). https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-017-0644-y
Breslin, D., & Bailey, K. (2020). Expanding the conversation through ‘Debate Essays’ and ‘Review Methodology’ papers. International Journal of Management Reviews, 22(3), 219–221. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijmr.12234
Breslin, D., & Gatrell, C. (2020). Theorizing through literature reviews: The miner-prospector continuum. Organizational Research Methods, 26(1), 1–29. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428120943288
Cowhitt, T., & Cutts, A. (2020). Using network analysis to compare bibliographic database journal coverage. Journal of Electronic Resources Librarianship, 32(3), 195–210. https://doi.org/10.1080/1941126X.2020.1790952
De Moya-Anegón, F., Chinchilla-Rodríguez, Z., Vargas-Quesada, B., Corera-Álvarez, E., Muñoz-Fernández, F. J., González-Molina, A., & Herrero-Solana, V. (2007). Coverage analysis of Scopus: A journal metric approach. Scientometrics, 73(1), 53–78. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-007-1681-4
Donthu, N., Kumar, S., Mukherjee, D., Pandey, N., & Lim, W. M. (2021). How to conduct a bibliometric analysis: An overview and guidelines. Journal of Business Research, 133, 285–296. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2021.04.070
Duncan, G. T. (1993). Management research methodology: Prospects and links to practice. The International Journal of Organizational Analysis, 1(3), 255–272. https://doi.org/10.1108/eb028791
Dźwigoł, H. (2021). Factors affecting the quality of research process. Zeszyty Naukowe. Organizacja i Zarządzanie / Politechnika Śląska, 151, 173–188. https://doi.org/10.9734/bpi/mono/978-93-91882-00-6/CH2
Engels, T. C. E., Istenič Starčič, A., Kulczycki, E., Pölönen, J., & Sivertsen, G. (2018). Are book publications disappearing from scholarly communication in the social sciences and humanities? Aslib Journal of Information Management, 70(6), 592–607. https://doi.org/10.1108/AJIM-05-2018-0127
Gulati, R. (2007). Tent poles, tribalism, and boundary spanning: The rigor-relevance debate in management research. Academy of Management Journal, 50(4), 775–782. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2007.26279170
Haupt, J. P. (2022). Short-term internationally mobile academics and their research collaborations upon return: Insights from the fulbright U.S. scholar program. Journal of Studies in International Education, 26(4), 511–530. https://doi.org/10.1177/1028315321990760
Hernández-Torrano, D., Karabassova, L., Izekenova, Z., & Courtney, M. G. R. (2021). Mapping education research in post-Soviet countries: A bibliometric analysis. International Journal of Educational Development, 87, 102502. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijedudev.2021.102502
Koontz, H. (1961). The management theory jungle. Academy of Management Journal, 4(3), 174–188. https://doi.org/10.5465/254541
Koontz, H. (1980). The management theory jungle revisited. Academy of Management Review, 5(2), 175–188. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1980.4288715
Kosch, O., & Szarucki, M. (2020). Transatlantic affiliations of scientific collaboration in strategic management: A quarter-century of bibliometric evidence. Journal of Business Economics and Management, 21(3), 627–646. https://doi.org/10.3846/jbem.2020.12395
Kosch, O., & Szarucki, M. (2021a). A model for custom bibliographic databases creation: Machine learning approach for analogue documents inclusion. In The Proceedings of the 18th International Conference of Scientometrics & Informetrics (pp. 573–584). ISSI. https://www.issi-society.org/proceedings/issi_2021/Proceedings%20ISSI%202021.pdf
Kosch, O., & Szarucki, M. (2021b). An overview of 25 years of european scientific collaboration in the field of strategic management: A bibliometric analysis. European Management Review, 18(1), 51–69. https://doi.org/10.1111/emre.12401
Kowal, M., Sorokowski, P., Kulczycki, E., & Żelaźniewicz, A. (2022). The impact of geographical bias when judging scientific studies. Scientometrics, 127(1), 265–273. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-021-04176-7
Krupa, M. (2006). „Dżungla“ teorii organizacji i zarządzania – poznanie zdeterminowane pytaniem o światopogląd? Annales. Etyka w Życiu Gospodarczym, 9(1), 339–349.
Kwiek, M. (2016). The European research elite: A cross-national study of highly productive academics in 11 countries. Higher Education, 71(3), 379–397. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-015-9910-x
Lemak, D. J. (2004). Leading students through the management theory jungle by following the path of the seminal theorists: A paradigmatic approach. Management Decision, 42(10), 1309–1325. https://doi.org/10.1108/00251740410568999
Linkov, V., O’Doherty, K., Choi, E., & Han, G. (2021). Linguistic diversity index: A scientometric measure to enhance the relevance of small and minority group languages. SAGE Open, 11(2). https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440211009191
Lisiński, M. (2016). Paradygmaty metodologiczne nauk o zarządzaniu. Prace Naukowe Uniwersytetu Ekonomicznego We Wroclawiu, 421, 375–385.
Moed, H. F., De Moya-Anegon, F., Guerrero-Bote, V., & Lopez-Illescas, C. (2020). Are nationally oriented journals indexed in Scopus becoming more international? The effect of publication language and access modality. Journal of Informetrics, 14(2), 101011. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2020.101011
Newman, M. E. J. (2003). The structure and function of complex networks. SIAM Review, 45(2), 167–256. https://doi.org/10.1137/S003614450342480
Page, M. J., McKenzie, J. E., Bossuyt, P. M., Boutron, I., Hoffmann, T. C., Mulrow, C. D., Shamseer, L., Tetzlaff, J. M., Akl, E. A., Brennan, S. E., Chou, R., Glanville, J., Grimshaw, J. M., Hróbjartsson, A., Lalu, M. M., Li, T., Loder, E. W., Mayo-Wilson, E., McDonald, S., … & Moher, D. (2021). The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. The BMJ, 372. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n71
Pineda, P., Gregorutti, G., & Streitwieser, B. (2020). Emerging decolonialized research collaboration: The max planck society and the Leibniz association in Latin America. Journal of Studies in International Education, 24(1), 59–78. https://doi.org/10.1177/1028315319888891
Rousseau, D. M., Manning, J., & Denyer, D. (2008). Evidence in management and organizational science: Assembling the field’s full weight of scientific knowledge through syntheses. The Academy of Management Annals, 2(1), 475–515. https://doi.org/10.1080/19416520802211651
Rousseau, S., & Rousseau, R. (2021). Bibliometric techniques and their use in business and economics research. Journal of Economic Surveys, 35(5), 1428–1451. https://doi.org/10.1111/joes.12415
Rybnicek, R., & Königsgruber, R. (2019). What makes industry–university collaboration succeed? A systematic review of the literature. Journal of Business Economics, 89(2), 221–250. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11573-018-0916-6
Samulevičius, J. (2012). Collaboration of business and science: A starting position for Lithuania’s move to radical economic change. Business: Theory and Practice, 13(3), 187–196. https://doi.org/10.3846/btp.2012.20
Sułkowski, Ł. (2016). Teorie, paradygmaty, metafory i ideologie zarządzania – kontrowersje wokół współczesnego dyskursu organizacji i zarządzania. Prace Naukowe Uniwersytetu Ekonomicznego We Wrocławiu, 422, 131–143.
Tunger, D., & Eulerich, M. (2018). Bibliometric analysis of corporate governance research in German-speaking countries: Applying bibliometrics to business research using a custom-made database. Scientometrics, 117(3), 2041–2059. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-018-2919-z
Zupic, I., & Čater, T. (2015). Bibliometric methods in management and organization. Organizational Research Methods, 18(3), 429–472. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428114562629