Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Scholars are charged with knowledge advancement by conducting relevant research. Academic researchers rely on the peer-review journal system to evaluate the quality and relevancy of their work. Despite its value, the current review system is flawed and sometimes results in fragmented knowledge formation. Some scholars, including Kouzes and Posner (K&P), publish research in books more accessible to practitioners. The impact of foregoing the traditional journal publication process on current knowledge is unclear. To explore this question, we used leadership scholarship as a case study and examined how K&P's leader credibility conceptualization, primarily shared in practitioner-focused books, was integrated into peer-review literature knowledge. More specifically, we compared K&P's definition with the conceptual definition which emerged from a comprehensive review of leader credibility definitions contained in peer-reviewed literature. We discuss the advantages of different pathways to relevancy and identify ways to achieve better collective knowledge by using these different pathways.

Keywords

knowledge management leadership qualitative research

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

AACSB. (2022). 2020 Guiding principles and standards for business accreditation, Effective July 28, 2020; Updated July 1, 2022. https://www.aacsb.edu/-/media/documents/accreditation/2020-aacsb-business-accreditation-standards-jul-1-2022.pdf.

Academy of International Business (AIB). (2023, November 29). About - Academy of International Business (AIB). https://www.aib.world/about/.

Akmal

Gaul

Podgorodnichenko

(2022). The rules of the game’: How business research journals discourage knowledge translation to practice and needs to change. Production Planning & Control, 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1080/09537287.2022.2144524

Ashforth

B. E.

(2005). Becoming vanilla pudding: How we determine our passion for research. Journal of Management Inquiry, 14(4), 400–403. https://doi.org/10.1177/1056492605280783

Astvansh

Fridmanski

(2023). Academic business research: Impact on academics versus impact on practice. PLOS ONE, 18(12), e0289034. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0289034

Baker

(2018). Uncited research. Times Higher Education. https://www.timeshighereducation.com/news/how-much-research-goes-completely-uncited.

Balkin

D. B.

Bresser

R. K. F.

(2021). Scholarly books as complementary contributions to “A’s”. Academy of Management Perspectives, 35(3), 562–566. https://doi.org/10.5465/amp.2021.0001

Banks

G. C.

McCauley

K. D.

Gardner

W. L.

Guler

C. E.

(2016). A meta-analytic review of authentic and transformational leadership: A test for redundancy. The Leadership Quarterly, 27(4), 634–652. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2016.02.006

Bedeian

A. G.

(2004). Peer review and the social construction of knowledge in the management discipline. Academy of Management Learning and Education, 3(2), 198–216. https://doi.org/10.5465/amle.2004.13500489

10.

Berlo

D. K.

Lemert

J. B.

Mertz

R. J.

(1969). Dimensions for evaluating the acceptability of message sources. Public Opinion Quarterly, 33(4), 563–576. https://doi.org/10.1086/267745

11.

Brown

(2018). Dare to lead: Brave work. Tough conversations. Whole hearts. Random house.

12.

Burrell

Hyman

M. R.

Michaelson

Nelson

J. A.

Taylor

West

(2022). The ethics and politics of academic knowledge production: Thoughts on the future of business ethics. Journal of Business Ethics, 180(3), 917–940. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-022-05243-6

13.

Cambridge University Press. (2023). A guide to peer reviewing book proposals. https://www.cambridge.org/core/services/aop-file-manager/file/5a1eb62839b03b2b0605becf/Refreshed-Guide-Peer-Review-Books.pdf.

14.

Cherniss

Extein

Goleman

Weissberg

R. P.

(2006). Emotional intelligence: What does the research really indicate? Educational Psychologist, 41(4), 239–245. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326985ep4104_4

15.

Cialdini

R. B.

(2007). Influence: The psychology of persuasion (Rev ed.; 1^st Collins business essentials ed). Collins.

16.

Collins

(2001a). Good to great. HarperCollins.

17.

Collins

(2001b). Level 5 leadership: The triumph of humility and fierce resolve. Harvard Business Review, 79(1), 67–76.

18.

Collins

Powell

(2004). SPOTLIGHT: The characteristics of level 5 leadership. Management Decision, 42(5), 709–716. https://ezproxy.mtsu.edu/login?url=https://www.proquest.com/scholarly-journals/spotlight-characteristics-level-5-leadership/docview/212084299/se-2 .

19.

Curcic

(2023). Number of academic papers published per year. Wordsrated. https://wordsrated.com/number-of-academic-papers-published-per-year/.

20.

de-Margerie

Jiang

(2011). How relevant is OM research to managerial practice? International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 31(2), 124–147. https://doi.org/10.1108/01443571111104737

21.

Eley

M. B.

(2018). If a report is published and no one reads it, did it really happen? Stanford Social Innovation Review. https://doi.org/10.48558/3GHN-N663

22.

Elsevier. (2020, December). How to get your research published … and then noticed. https://www.elsevier.com/?a=91173.

23.

Eveleth

(2014). Academics write papers arguing over how many people read (and cite) their papers. Smithsonian. https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/half-academic-studies-are-never-read-more-three-people-180950222/.

24.

Farling

M. L.

Stone

A. G.

Winston

B. E.

(1999). Servant leadership: Setting the stage for empirical research. Journal of Leadership Studies, 6(1-2), 49–72. https://doi.org/10.1177/107179199900600104

25.

Fire

Guestrin

(2019). Over-optimization of academic publishing metrics: Observing Goodhart’s law in action. GigaScience, 8(6), giz053. https://doi.org/10.1093/gigascience/giz053

26.

Freedman

(2016, September 20). What is the peer review process for books? SpringerNature: The Source. https://www.springernature.com/gp/researchers/the-source/blog/blogposts-for-peer-reviewers/what-is-the-peer-review-process-for-books/16676134.

27.

Gabris

G. T.

Ihrke

D. M.

(2007). No end to hierarchy: Does rank make a difference in perceptions of leadership credibility? Administration & Society, 39(1), 107–123. https://doi.org/10.1177/0095399706296616

28.

George

Sims

(2007). True north: Discover your authentic leadership. Jossey-Bass.

29.

George

Sims

McLean

A. N.

Mayer

(2007). Discovering your authentic leadership. Harvard Business Review, 85(2), 129.

30.

Gokcen

A. O.

Bulu

(2017). Is measuring the knowledge creation of universities possible? A review of university rankings. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 123(C), 153–160. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2016.03.029

31.

Goleman

Boyatzis

McKee

(2001). Primal leadership: The hidden driver of great performance. Harvard Business Review, 79(11), 42–53.

32.

Goleman

Boyatzis

McKee

(2002). Primal leadership: Realizing the power of emotional intelligence. Harvard Business School Press.

33.

Grant

(2016). Originals: How non-conformists move the world. Viking.

34.

Grant

A. M.

Ashford

S. J.

(2008). The dynamics of proactivity at work. Research in Organizational Behaviour, 28(2), 3–34. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.riob.2008.04.002

35.

Grant

D. B.

Kovács

Spens

K. M.

(2018). Questionable research practices in academia: Antecedents and consequences. European Business Review, 30(2), 101–127. https://doi.org/10.1108/EBR-12-2016-0155

36.

Harzing

A. W.

(2023). Using the Publish or Perish software: Crafting your career in academia. Tarma Software Research Ltd.

37.

Heifetz

R. A.

Laurie

D. L.

(2001). The work of leadership. Harvard Business Review, 79(11), 131–141.

38.

Heifetz

R. A.

Linsky

(2002a). Leadership on the line: Staying alive through the dangers of leading. Harvard Business Press.

39.

Heifetz

R. A.

Linsky

(2002b). A survival guide for leaders. Harvard Business Review, 80(6), 65–74.

40.

Hitt

M. A.

Ireland

R. D.

(1987). Peters and Waterman revisited: The unended quest for excellence. Academy of Management Executive, 1(2), 91–98. https://doi.org/10.5465/ame.1987.4275812

41.

Horn

S. A.

(2017). The social and psychological costs of peer review: Stress and coping with manuscript rejection. Journal of Management Inquiry, 25(1), 11–26. https://doi.org/10.1177/1056492615586597

42.

Hovland

C. I.

Janis

I. L.

Kelley

H. H.

(1953). Communication and persuasion. Yale University Press.

43.

Jakobsen

M. L. F.

Andersen

L. B.

van Luttervelt

M. P.

(2022). Theorizing leadership credibility: The concept and causes of the perceived credibility of leadership initiatives. Perspectives on Public Management and Governance, 5(3), 243–254. https://doi.org/10.1093/ppmgov/gvac009

44.

Kelly

Sadeghieh

Adeli

(2014). Peer review in scientific publications: Benefits, critiques, & a survival guide. EJIFCC, 25(3), 227–243.

45.

Kim

(2023, January 31). 3 questions on academic library budgets for an assessment and planning librarian. Inside Higher Ed. https://www.insidehighered.com/blogs/learning-innovation/3-questions-academic-library-budgets-assessment-and-planning-librarian.

46.

King

(2011). Research and information services: Demonstrating commercial relevance. Business Information Review, 28(2), 112–118. https://doi.org/10.1177/0266382111407131

47.

Körner

Röseler

Schütz

Bushman

B. J.

(2022). Dominance and prestige: Meta-analytic review of experimentally induced body position effects on behavioral, self-report, and physiological dependent variables. Psychological Bulletin, 148(1-2), 67–85. https://doi.org/10.1037/bul0000356

48.

Kotter

J. P.

(1996). Leading change. Harvard Business School Press.

49.

Kotter

J. P.

Schlesinger

L. A.

(1979). Choosing strategies for change. Harvard Business Review, 1979.March/April.

50.

Kousha

Thelwall

(2018). Can Microsoft Academic help to assess the citation impact of academic books? Journal of Informetrics, 12(3), 972–984. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2018.08.003

51.

Kouzes

J. M.

Posner

B. Z.

(1987, 1995, 2003, 2007, 2012, 2017, 2023). The leadership challenge: How to make extraordinary things happen in organizations. Jossey-Bass (A Wiley Imprint).

52.

Kouzes

J. M.

Posner

B. Z.

(1990). The credibility factor: What followers expect from their leaders. Management Review, 79(1), 29+. https://link.gale.com/apps/doc/A8255147/AONE?u=googlescholar&sid=bookmark-AONE&xid=c9f23d3e .

53.

Kouzes

J. M.

Posner

B. Z.

(1993, 2003, 2011). Credibility: How leaders gain and lose it, why people demand it. Jossey-Bass (A Wiley Imprint).

54.

Kouzes

J. M.

Posner

B. Z.

(2005). Leading in cynical times. Journal of Management Inquiry, 14(4), 357–364. https://doi.org/10.1177/1056492605280221

55.

Kyvick

(2013). The academic researcher role: Enhancing expectations and improved performance. Higher Education, 65(4), 525–538. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-012-9561-0

56.

Macdonald

(2015). Emperor’s new clothes: The reinvention of peer review as myth. Journal of Management Inquiry, 24(3), 264–279. https://doi.org/10.1177/1056492614554773

57.

Marcus

(2021, April 30). Some universities’ response to budget woes: Making faculty teach more courses. The Hechinger Report. https://hechingerreport.org/some-universities-response-to-budget-woes-making-faculty-teach-more-courses/.

58.

McCroskey

J. C.

(1966). Scales for the measurement of ethos. Speech Monographs, 33(1), 65–72. https://doi.org/10.1080/03637756609375482

59.

Mone

M. A.

McKinley

(1993). The uniqueness value and its consequences for organization studies. Journal of Management Inquiry, 2(3), 284–296. https://doi.org/10.1177/105649269323010

60.

Peters

T. J.

Waterman

R. H.

(1982). In search of excellence: Lessons from best companies of America. Harper Collins.

61.

Posner

B. Z.

Kouzes

J. M.

(1988a). Development and validation of the Leadership Practices Inventory. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 48(2), 483–496. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013164488482024

62.

Posner

B. Z.

Kouzes

J. M.

(1988b). Relating leadership and credibility. Psychological Reports, 63(2), 527–530. https://doi.org/10.2466/pr0.1988.63.2.527

63.

Posner

B. Z.

Kouzes

J. M.

(1993). Psychometric properties of the leadership practices inventory-updated. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 53(1), 191–199. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013164493053001021

64.

Saffle

(2012). Sustainability and emerging issues in scholarly (self-)publishing. The Environmentalist, 32(3), 326–331. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10669-011-9351-8

65.

Savage

W. E.

Olejniczak

A. J.

(2022). More journal articles and fewer books: Publication practices in the social sciences in the 2010’s. PLOS ONE, 17(2), e0263410. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0263410

66.

Simson

Greco

A. N.

(2018). The price and new title output of scholarly books: 2009-2016. Publishing Research Quarterly, 34(2), 218–237. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12109-018-9576-1

67.

Srimulyani

V. A.

Hermanto

Y. B.

(2022). Organizational culture as a mediator of credible leadership influence on work engagement: Empirical studies in private hospitals in east Java, Indonesia. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, 9(1), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-022-01289-z

68.

Starbuck

W. H.

(2003). Turning lemons into lemonade: Where is the value in peer reviews? Journal of Management Inquiry, 12(4), 344–351. https://doi.org/10.1177/1056492603258972

69.

Taylor

(2023). 2021 ACRL Academic Library Trends and Statistics Survey: Highlights and key academic library instruction and group presentation findings. College & Research Libraries News, 84(4), 149. https://doi.org/10.5860/crln.84.4.149

70.

Time (2023). Time magazine’s 25 most influential business management books. https://content.time.com/time/specials/packages/completelist/0,29569,2086680,00.html.

71.

Toffel

M. W.

(2016). Enhancing the practical relevance of research. Production and Operations Management, 25(9), 1493–1505. https://doi.org/10.1111/poms.12558

72.

Tsafnat

Glasziou

Choong

M. K.

Dunn

Galgani

Coiera

(2014). Systematic review automation technologies. Systematic Reviews, 3(1), 74. https://doi.org/10.1186/2046-4053-3-74

73.

Tsai

S. J.

(2022, Feb. 9). What’s a good impact factor (ranking in 27 categories). SCI Journal, https://www.scijournal.org/articles/good-impact-factor .

74.

Tsang

E. W. K.

(2013). Is this referee really my peer? A challenge to the peer-review process. Journal of Management Inquiry, 22(2), 166–171. https://doi.org/10.1177/1056492612461306

75.

Tsang

E. W. K.

(2022). That’s interesting! A flawed article has influenced generations of management researchers. Journal of Management Inquiry, 31(2), 150–164. https://doi.org/10.1177/10564926211048708

76.

Tsang

E. W. K.

Frey

B. S.

(2007). The as-is journal review process: Let the authors own their ideas. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 6(1), 128–136. https://doi.org/10.5465/amle.2007.24401710

77.

Wiley (2023). Wiley author services: Reviewing manuscripts. https://authorservices.wiley.com/Reviewers/book-reviewers/reviewing-manuscripts.html.

78.

Williams

R. I.

Raffo

D. M.

Clark

W. R.

Clark

L. A.

(2022). A systematic review of leader credibility: Its murky framework needs clarity. Management Review Quarterly, 73(4), 1751–1794. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11301-022-00285-6

79.

Williams Jr.

Clark

W. R.

Raffo

D. M.

Clark

L. A.

(2023). Building leader credibility: Guidance drawn from literature. Journal of Management Development, 42(2), 106–124. https://doi.org/10.1108/JMD-09-2022-0230

80.

Williams Jr

R. I.

Clark

L. A.

Clark

W. R.

Raffo

D. M.

(2021). Re-examining systematic literature review in management research: Additional benefits and execution protocols. European Management Journal, 39(4), 521–533. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.emj.2020.09.007

81.

Wright

T. A.

Emich

Pearce

J. L.

Ramoglou

Ashkanasy

Bartunek

J. M.

Kunisch

Denyer

Foss

N. J.

Klein

P. G.

Town

Hollwitz

Barney

C. E.

Harms

Munyon

T. P.

Seijts

Tsang

E. W. K.

(2024). Advocacy and the search for truth in management scholarship: Can the twain ever meet? Journal of Management Inquiry, 33(1), 11–25. https://doi.org/10.1177/10564926231203522

82.

Zolkiewski

(2018). Bridging the relevance-ranking chasm: Mission impossible? European Business Review, 30(2), 128–144. https://doi.org/10.1108/EBR-03-2017-0067

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

0.03 MB

Balancing Relevancy and Rigor: Exploring the Impact of Scholarly Books on Knowledge Formation in Business Research

Abstract

Keywords

Get full access to this article

References

Supplementary Material