Taylorizing business school research: On the "one best way' performative effects of journal ranking lists

被引：167

作者：

Mingers, John ^{[1
]}

Willmott, Hugh ^{[2
]}

机构：

[1] Univ Kent, Canterbury CT2 7NZ, Kent, England

[2] Cardiff Univ, Cardiff CF10 3AX, S Glam, Wales

来源：

HUMAN RELATIONS | 2013年 / 66卷 / 08期

关键词：

journal lists; knowledge development; performance measurement; performativity; research evaluation; Taylorization; work culture; RESEARCH ASSESSMENT EXERCISE; MANAGEMENT RESEARCH; HIGHER-EDUCATION; RESEARCH QUALITY; ACADEMIC LABOR; UK; FUTURE; KNOWLEDGE; POLITICS; REFLECTIONS;

D O I：

10.1177/0018726712467048

中图分类号：

C93 [管理学];

学科分类号：

12 ; 1201 ; 1202 ; 120202 ;

摘要：

The article critically examines how work is shaped by performance measures. Its specific focus is upon the use of journal lists, rather than the detail of their construction, in conditioning the research activity of academics. It is argued that an effect of the one size fits all' logic of journal lists is to endorse and cultivate a research monoculture in which particular criteria, favoured by a given list, assume the status of a universal benchmark of performance (research quality'). The article demonstrates, with reference to the Association of Business Schools (ABS) Journal Guide', how use of a journal list can come to dominate and define the focus and trajectory of a field of research, with detrimental consequences for the development of scholarship.

引用

页码：1051 / 1073

页数：23

共 89 条

[1] When Knowledge Wins: Transcending the Sense and Nonsense of Academic Rankings [J].