Sport Management Research Productivity and Impact for Ranking Considerations

被引:1
作者
Seifried, Chad [1 ]
Martinez, J. Michael [1 ]
Qian, Yizhou [1 ]
Zvosec, Claire [1 ]
Svensson, Per G. [1 ]
Soebbing, Brian P. [2 ]
Agyemang, Kwame [3 ]
机构
[1] Louisiana State Univ, Baton Rouge, LA 70803 USA
[2] Univ Alberta, Edmonton, AB, Canada
[3] Univ Kentucky, Lexington, KY USA
关键词
journals; doctoral universities; Carnegie Commission on Higher Education; BUSINESS SCHOOLS; REPUTATIONS; PROGRAM; CREDIT; AUTHOR;
D O I
10.1123/smej.2023-0026
中图分类号
G40 [教育学];
学科分类号
040101 ; 120403 ;
摘要
The present essay aims to promote further dialogue within the sport management community about research productivity and impact by outlining various considerations that should take place within any potential ranking attempt. Some may question why examining research production and impact matters to sport management education, but the mission of many institutions of higher education is not exclusively centered on teaching and training the next generation of leaders. In many instances, sport management programs and faculty are collectively compelled by their host institution to develop theory and search for answers to important questions that can shape future sport management practices, including classroom activities and materials. In the present essay, a rationale is provided for why sport management programs and individual faculty should be interested in developing their own tailored research output and impact rankings. Next, a list of research product variables is offered for consideration, and a conversation is provided about their need and impact with respect to the uniqueness of sport management-a multiinterdisciplinary field. Finally, recommendations for the weighing of such variables to tailor an approach best suited to programs based on college or department home, faculty appointment/workload, and faculty-to-student ratio are submitted.
引用
收藏
页码:157 / 165
页数:9
相关论文
共 42 条
  • [1] "AN A IS AN A": THE NEW BOTTOM LINE FOR VALUING ACADEMIC RESEARCH
    Aguinis, Herman
    Cummings, Chailin
    Ramani, Ravi S.
    Cummings, Thomas G.
    [J]. ACADEMY OF MANAGEMENT PERSPECTIVES, 2020, 34 (01) : 135 - 154
  • [2] [Anonymous], 2022, Accreditation principles manual & guidelines for self-study preparation
  • [3] Building reputations: The role of alliances in the European business school scene
    Baden-Fuller, C
    Ang, SH
    [J]. LONG RANGE PLANNING, 2001, 34 (06) : 741 - 755
  • [4] Making and measuring reputations -: The research ranking of European business schools
    Baden-Fuller, C
    Ravazzolo, F
    Schweizer, T
    [J]. LONG RANGE PLANNING, 2000, 33 (05) : 621 - 650
  • [5] Brown L.D., 2004, REV QUANTITATIVE FIN, V22, P249, DOI 10.1023/B:REQU.0000025763.61552.0
  • [6] Challis J.H., 2021, KINESIOL REV, V10
  • [7] Using Google Scholar citations to rank accounting programs: a global perspective
    Chan J.Y.
    Chan K.C.
    Tong J.Y.
    Zhang F.
    [J]. Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting, 2016, 47 (1) : 29 - 55
  • [8] Factors That Motivate Business Faculty to Conduct Research: An Expectancy Theory Analysis
    Chen, Yining
    Gupta, Ashok
    Hoshower, Leon
    [J]. JOURNAL OF EDUCATION FOR BUSINESS, 2006, 81 (04) : 179 - 189
  • [9] Commission on Sport Management Accreditation, 2022, COSMA NEWS
  • [10] Dawkins M.C., 2015, ACAD ED LEADERSHIP J, V19, P1