This commentary critically examines the issues raised in the article by Bedeian, Van Fleet, and Hyman from a functional perspective, one that might be used in decisions about who should be a member of a prototypic work group. It takes the position that, like a work group, a journal editorial board exists for a purpose, and that purpose (or function) should play a major role in determining the criteria to be used when staffing the board's membership. When contemporary thinking about the staffing of work groups is applied, the current practices of the journals of interest are found to be appropriate and defensible.
Agarwal, R., & Hoetker, G. (2007). A Faustian bargain? The growth of management and its relationship to related disciplines. Academy of Management Journal, 50(6), 1304-1322.
2.
Bartunek, J.M. (2007). Academic-practitioner collaboration need not require joint or relevant research: Toward a relational scholarship of integration . Academy of Management Journal, 50(6), 1323-1333.
3.
Bedeian, A.G., Van Fleet, D.D., & Hyman, H.H. (2009). Scientific achievement and editorial board membership . Organizational Research Methods, 12(2), 211-238.
4.
Biehl, M., Kim, H., & Wade, M. (2006). Relationships among the academic business disciplines: A multi-method citation analysis. Omega, 34, 359-371.
5.
Borman, W.C., & Motowidlo, S.J. (1997). Task performance and contextual performance: The meaning for personnel selection research. Human Performance, 10, 99-109.
6.
Boyack, K.W., Klavans, R., & Borner, K. (2005). Mapping the backbone of science. Scientometrics, 64, 341-374.
7.
Cacioppo, J. (2007). Psychology is a hub science. Observer, 20(8), 3-4.
8.
Denisi, A. (in press). Managing the editorial review process: It's the people that matter. In Y. Baruch, A. Konrad, H. Aguinis, & W. H. Starbuck (Eds.), Opening the black box of editorship. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.
9.
Feldman, D.C. (in press). Building and maintaining a strong editorial board and core of as hoc reviewers. In Y. Baruch, A. Konrad, H. Aguinis, & W. H. Starbuck (Eds.), Opening the black box of editorship. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.
10.
Glenn, D. (2008, February 1). New economics journals: Supply, demand, risk. Chronicle of Higher Education, p. A10.
11.
Hambrick, D.C. (2007). The field of management's devotion to theory: Too much of a good thing? Academy of Management Journal, 50, 1346-1352.
12.
Harvey, C.,Morris, H., & Kelly, A. (Eds.). (2007 ). Academic journal quality guide. London : Association of Business Schools.
13.
Kacmar, K.M. (in press). Setting up an effective manuscript review process. In Y. Baruch, A. Konrad, H. Aguinis, & W. H. Starbuck (Eds.), Opening the black box of editorship. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.
14.
Klimoski, R.J. (in press). Team performance effectiveness. In J. Levine & M. Hogg (Eds.), Encyclopedia of group processes and intergroup relations. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
15.
Klimoski, R.J., & Zukin, L. (1999). Selection and staffing for team effectiveness . In E. Sundstrom (Ed.), Supporting work team effectiveness (pp. 63-94). San Francisco : Jossey-Bass.
16.
Macdonald, S., Kam, J. (2007). Aardvark et al.: Quality journals and gamesmanship in management studies. Journal of Information Science, 33, 702-717.
17.
Marks, M.A., Zaccaro, S.J., & Mathieu, J.E. (2001). A temporally based framework and taxonomy of team processes. Academy of Management Review, 26, 356-376.
Pfeffer, J. (2007). A modest proposal: How might we change the process and product of managerial research. Academy of Management Journal, 50(6), 1334-1345.
20.
Rynes, S.L. (2007). Editors foreword: Tackling the ``great divide'' between research production and dissemination in human resource management . Academy of Management Journal, 50(5), 985-986.
21.
Rynes, S.L. (in press). Communicating with authors. In Y. Baruch, A. Konrad, H. Aguinis, & W. H. Starbuck (Eds.), Opening the black box of editorship. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.
22.
Schmitt, N., & Borman, W.C. (1993). Personnel selection in organizations. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
23.
Tsui, A.S., & Hollenbeck, J.R. (2009). Successful authors and effective reviewers: Balancing supply and demand in the organizational sciences . Organizational Research Methods12(2), 253-258.
