This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Kirkpatrick, S. A. Articles by Locke, E. A. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

The Development of Measures of Faculty Scholarship

University of Maryland

Edwin A. Locke

University of Maryland

Comprehensive and valid measures for evaluating faculty scholarship are needed for two main purposes: appraising the performance of individual faculty and rating business schools and departments. This study reports a methodology for assessing faculty scholarship that, it is argued, represents an improvement over previous approaches. Three sources of scholarship information (articles, citations, and peer ratings) were obtained on each of 2,229 faculty in 32 business schools. The three measures of scholarship were significantly but not perfectly correlated, indicating that combining the three measures would yield a more comprehensive index of scholarship than any one measure alone. Scholarship measures were obtained for faculty in five areas or departments (accounting, finance, management science and statistics, management, and marketing). The effect of weighting for department size was substantial, but the effect of differentially weighting the three components of scholarship was not. The implications for faculty performance appraisal as well as department and business school appraisals are discussed.

Group & Organization Management, Vol. 17, No. 1, 5-23 (1992)
DOI: 10.1177/1059601192171002


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				P. M. Podsakoff, S. B. MacKenzie, N. P. Podsakoff, and D. G. Bachrach 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, August 1, 2008; 34(4): 641 - 720. [Abstract] [PDF]

				S. Macdonald and J. Kam Aardvark et al.: quality journals and gamesmanship in management studies Journal of Information Science, December 1, 2007; 33(6): 702 - 717. [Abstract] [PDF]

				P. S. Rogers, N. Campbell, L. Louhiala-Salminen, K. Rentz, and J. Suchan The Impact of Perceptions of Journal Quality on Business and Management Communication Academics Journal of Business Communication, October 1, 2007; 44(4): 403 - 426. [Abstract] [PDF]

				D. D. Van Fleet, A. McWilliams, and D. S. Siegel A Theoretical and Empirical Analysis of Journal Rankings: The Case of Formal Lists Journal of Management, October 1, 2000; 26(5): 839 - 861. [Abstract] [PDF]

				S. Meisel and J. Seltzer Rethinking Management Education: a TQM Perspective Journal of Management Education, February 1, 1995; 19(1): 75 - 95. [PDF]