Pan-Pacific Conference XXXIV. Designing New Business Models in Developing Economies

papers ranked as 3 and 0,55 papers ranked as 4-4* were
required. However, more papers ranked as 3 and 4-4*
(3,59 and 0,64, respectively) were required in order for
these academics to reach Professorship after their 1st
promotion, though in comparatively less time. For this
group of academics, the average number of 3-4* papers
per year to first promotion was 0,44, from 1st promotion
to Professorship this increases to 0,71 and from
Professorship onwards becomes 1,04. This designates an
increase in productivity at higher ranks.
For faculty currently at the professor level, the average
quality of 3-4* publications to first promotion is 3,18,
increasing to 3,24 from first promotion to Professorship,
reaching finally 3,44 from Professorship onwards,
designating also an increase in the quality of the
publications as time goes and faculty reaching higher
academic higher ranks. For this group of professors, 10
(22,7%) had no publications in journals ranked as 3-4*,
whereas 11 academics (25%) have published in 4-4*
journals until they reached their first promotion. In
addition, the last two promotion periods (up to
Professorship and beyond), 5 academics had no
publications in journals ranked as 3-4*.
FUTURE RESEARCH
management related journals: the European
perspective. Journal of Operations
Management, 1999, 17(2), 225-238.
[8] Stonebraker, J.S., Gil, E., Kirkwood, C.W., &
Handfield, R.B. Impact factor as a metric to
assess journals where OM research is
published. Journal of Operations Management,
2012, 30(1), 24-43.
[9] Vokurka, R.J. The relative importance of
journals used in operations management
research a citation analysis. Journal of
Operations Management, 1996, 14(4), 345-
355.
[10] Young, S.T., Baird, B.C., & Pullman, M.E.
POM research productivity in US business
schools. Journal of Operations Management,
1996, 14(1), 41-53.
[11] Zsidisin, G.A., Smith, M.E., McNally, R.C., &
Kull, T.J. Evaluation criteria development and
assessment of purchasing and supply
management journals. Journal of Operations
Management, 2007, 25(1), 165-183
The research will be extended by testing the following
hypotheses: (i) the research productivity of OM/OR
academics increases as they advance to higher ranks; (ii)
the research quality of academics’ publications increases
at higher ranks; (iii) collaboration of academics differ
significantly in different academic ranks; and (iv) the
research productivity and the time required to achieve
tenure in recent years differs significantly than before.
REFERENCES
[1] Babbar, S., Prasad, S., & Tata, J. An empirical
assessment of institutional and individual
research productivity in international
operations management. International Journal
of Operations and Production Management,
2000, 20(12), 1392-1410.
[2] Barman, S., Hanna, M.D., & LaForge, R.L.
Perceived relevance and quality of POM
journals: a decade later. Journal of Operations
Management, 2001, 19(3), 367-385.
[3] [3] Cargile, B.R., & Bublitz, B. Factors
contributing to published research by
accounting faculties. The Accounting Review,
January 1986, 158-178.
[4] [4] Gorman, M.F., & Kanet, J.J.
Evaluating Operations Management–Related
Journals via the Author Affiliation Index.
Manufacturing and Service Operations
Management, 2005, 7(1), 3-19.
[5] [5] Hsieh, P.N., & Chang, P.L. An
assessment of world-wide research productivity
in production and operations management.
International Journal of Production Economics,
2009, 120 (2), 540-551.
[6] [6] Shang, G., Saladin, B., Fry, T., &
Donohue, J. Twenty-six years of operations
management research (1985–2010): authorship
patterns and research constituents in eleven top
rated journals. International Journal of
Production Research, 2015, 53(20), 6161-6197.
[7] [7] Soteriou, A.C., Hadjinicola, G.C., &
Patsia, K. Assessing production and operations
180