You are on page 1of 15

How Advanced Is the Strategy Paradigm?

The Role of Particularism and Universalism in


Shaping Research Outcomes
Author(s): Brian K. Boyd, Sydney Finkelstein and Steve Gove
Source: Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 26, No. 9 (Sep., 2005), pp. 841-854
Published by: Wiley
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/20142272 .
Accessed: 01/05/2013 11:15
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Wiley and John Wiley & Sons are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Strategic
Management Journal.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 130.115.80.102 on Wed, 1 May 2013 11:15:18 AM


All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Strategie
Published

online

inWiley

InterScience

Journal

Management

./.. 26: 841-854

Streit. Mgmt.

DOI:

(www.interscience.wiley.com).

(2005)

10.1002/smj.477

HOW ADVANCED ISTHE STRATEGY PARADIGM?


THE ROLEOF PARTICULARISMAND UNIVERSALISM
INSHAPING RESEARCHOUTCOMES
BRIAN K. BOYD,1* SYDNEY FINKELSTEIN2and STEVE GOVE3
1
W.

P. Carey

2
Amos

of Business,

Arizona

of Business

Administration,

State

University,

Arizona,

Tempe,

Dartmouth

College,

U.S.A.

Hanover,

New

U.S.A.

Hampshire,

3
School

School

Tuck School
of Business

Administration,

University

of Dayton,

Dayton,

Ohio, U.S.A.

we examine
has progressed
the field
how far
reaches
its 25th anniversary,
the field
of strategy
as being
in
research
have been characterized
and strategy
that time. Both management
during
an early stage of development.
which
We draw on Kuhn's
model,
(1996) paradigm
development
to
a connection
a field's
and outcomes,
and research
between
processes
stage of maturity
posits
a cross-discipline
two
is
assess
We
The
studies.
conduct
the
the maturity
strategy
first
field.
of
norms for university
The second
longitudinal
study examines
faculty.
comparison
of productivity

As

research
attributes
to other

outcomes
of both
fields,

indicate
that strategy
has the
Our results
of 945 strategy faculty.
for a sample
norms are low relative
an early stage and mature field:
overall
research
while
?
than non-merit
by merit-based
factors.
Copyright
they are driven far more

2005 JohnWiley & Sons, Ltd.

to many academic disciplines,


strategy
Compared
is a young field: 2003 marked the 25th anniversary
of the field's first textbook (Hofer and Schendel,
of the
1978), and 2004 was the Silver Anniversary
its youth,
Journal. Despite
Strategic Management
strategy has clearly become an integral component
school landscape. Business
of the global business
is the second largest divi
and Strategy
Policy
and counts
of Management,
sion of the Academy
the
from
outside
of
its
25 percent
membership
the
half
United States. Furthermore,
membership
lies outside
of the Strategic Management
Society
North America. The discipline has begun to influ
ence its 'parent' field: the discipline's
flagship
journal, SMJ, is surpassed only by AMR for article
impact by a business journal (Institute for Scien
tific Inquiry, 2002), and has been described as 'the
re
research;
strategy
development;
paradigm
Keywords:
search productivity
of
P. Carey
to: Brian K. Boyd, W.
School
^Correspondence
Arizona
State University,
Business,
Tempe, AZ 85287, U.S.A.
E-mail: briankboyd@asu.edu

Copyright ? 2005 JohnWiley & Sons, Ltd.

predominant academic journal influencing the field


1999: 279).
of management'
(Tahai and Meyer,
The importance of the field also resonates with
the practitioner audience, as indicated by Business
Week's selection of SMJ as one of the key indica
tors of b-school
'brainpower.' Clearly, strategy as
a discipline has grown substantially
in both scope
and influence over the last few decades.
though, how far has
Independent of prominence,
the field of strategy matured
during this time?
is strategy in its infancy, adoles
Stated differently,
cence, or middle age? The paradigm model (Kuhn,
1996) asserts that research activities and outcomes
level of matu
vary as a function of a field's
are expected to exhibit
rity: early-stage disciplines
and research
lower levels of research productivity,
are often determined by factors such as
outcomes
prestige rather than merit.
to explore
We conduct a number of analyses
this question, using two discrete samples. We draw
from a national survey to determine whether gross
research norms differ for management
faculty vs.

Received

October 2002

30
Final

revision

This content downloaded from 130.115.80.102 on Wed, 1 May 2013 11:15:18 AM


All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

received

4 March

2005

B. K. Boyd,

842

S. Finkelstein

and S. Gove

their counterparts
in business
schools
and the
broader population
of university
faculty. Second,
we use a longitudinal
series of structural equation
to identify drivers of research outcomes for
models
a sample of strategy faculty. By evaluating both
the levels and determinants
of research productiv
we
a
assessment of the
provide
ity,
comprehensive
field's maturity.

LITERATURE REVIEW AND


HYPOTHESES
The

(Kuhn, 1996) ratio


paradigm development
some
are more
that
argues
(a)
disciplines
advanced
than others, and (b) these differences
affect the way
research
is done. Communities
with more developed paradigms have greater struc

to the literature (Long, Allison,


and
and
McGinnis,
1979; Rogers
Maranto,
1989).
a significant number of
However,
early publishers
never author another article (Zivney and Bertin,
1992), and precocity has limited effects on down
stream outcomes
such as job change and tenure
contribution

decisions.
outcomes may also be driven
Hence,
measures
additional
of ability. Author
order
by
an
indicator
of
with
lead
author
merit,
provides
the greatest proportion
of contri
ship indicating
bution
of Management,
1998; Floyd,
(Academy
and
Schroeder,
Finn, 1994). Additionally,
publi
cation in a higher-quality
journal is also likely to
indicate the ability of an individual researcher.

nale

ture and predictability


(Lodahl and Gordon,
1972),
and fewer debates
'over legitimate methods,
prob
lems, and standards of solution' (Kuhn, 1996: 48).
In contrast, less mature fields have weaker
lev
els of consensus
researchers.
These
dis
among
create

agreements

barriers

to research

productiv
ity, including higher journal rejection rates (Har
review cycles
gens, 1975), and longer manuscript
and more revisions
(Beyer, 1978). Consequently,
in more advanced paradigms may be
researchers
than their counter
expected to be more productive
fields.
parts in less developed
A field's
level of paradigm
is
development
to
affect
decisions
about
which
articles
expected
are published
and cited. Evaluation
of a scien
tific contribution on the quality of ideas represents
a universalistic
based
standard, while evaluations
on non-merit
factors (e.g., pedigree,
advisor rep
utation, social networks) are deemed
'particularis
are
tic' Research
outcomes
in mature disciplines
on
to
be
based
universalistic
criteria:
expected

tance,

it is essential
should

too much.

not

enter

that particularistic
into the bases

considera
of

judgment

(Parsons, 1939: 462-463)

and ability are universalistic


Precocity
predictors
of research outcomes.
publishing
Precocity,
early
in one's career, has been linked with subsequent
2005 John Wiley

and Fox, 1995; Cable and Mur


Beyer, Chanove,
et
with an
al., 1979). Affiliation
ray, 1999; Long
elite institution offers many advantages
in the pre
social ties, percep
field, including
paradigmatic
tions of competence,
and nepotism
(Crane, 1967;
insti
Pfeffer, Leong, and Strehl, 1977). However,
tutional prestige has a limited relationship with
the quality of faculty or education
is
provided,
slow to change, and is driven more by halo fac
tors than academic research (Keith and Babchuk,
1994). Similarly,
many
been found to positively

non-merit
factors have
affect prestige,
including
of its faculty (Hagstrom,

department size, pedigree


1971), and overall university
Babchuk,
1994).
the use of blind
Despite

reputation

(Keith and

institutional
reviews,
found to positively
affect pub
in less developed
paradigms
has
(Crane, 1967; Pfeffer et al., 1977). Prestige
been linked with perceived
quality of published
articles: the prestige of an author's degree-granting
has a direct effect on article cita
institution
has been
outcomes

of article quality
tion, independent
(Rogers and
Maranto,
1989). The strength of these findings led
one author to conclude:
'Stratification of the social
sciences
is primarily a function of the underlying

Universalism

Copyright ?

The paradigm
asserts that, in imma
framework
ture fields, research outcomes will be driven by
criteria, an approach at odds with
particularistic
the normative model of science. A pedigree from
a top school
is a common
basis
for particu
larism (Allison
and Long,
1987; Baldi,
1995;

prestige
lication

a
Science
is essentially
states
who
universalistic,
to the question
is as such irrelevant
of
proposition
... Where
its scientific
value
technical
competence
... and the like are of
functional
primary
impor
tions

Particularism

&

Sons,

Ltd.

process in which certain groups are sys


denied
information
about and access
tematically
to positions
of influence
1974: 274).'
(Yoels,

political

Strat.

Mgmt.

J.,

This content downloaded from 130.115.80.102 on Wed, 1 May 2013 11:15:18 AM


All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

26: 841-854

(2005)

State
In contrast, studies of paradigmatically
advanced
to be only weakly
related to
fields find prestige
subsequent research productivity or citations (Long
et ai, 1979).
are not evenly
distributed
Citations
among
authors. Cole and Cole (1971) report that a few
the bulk

received

authors

and some
had 600 or more

of citations

2 percent
none?only
to their work and 86 percent had fewer
than 15. In an immature paradigm, given the choice
between citing two articles of comparable quality,
author will be cited
the paper by a well-known
more frequently than one by a junior scholar (Mer
receive

citations

and Merton,
ton, 1968; Zuckerman
1971). Such
as it is irrespective of
a practice is particularistic
quality. In a study of advanced paradigms, Cole
and Cole (1967) reported that the most influential
papers were by a group they label Perfectionists:
persons who produced very few, but high-quality
that this relationship
articles. They hypothesized
in less advanced disciplines:
would be different
'When scientists cannot agree on what high quality
is, their concern is likely to be with quantity of out
in
1971: 26). In other words,
put' (Cole and Cole,
immature paradigms, prolific authors will be per
ceived as doing better research, and hence have
each of their articles cited more frequently.

on

in
particularism
can be divided
into primary
academe
(publica
outcomes
tions and citations) and secondary
(hir
are the
ing and job changes). Primary outcomes
most appropriate level to test for universalistic
and
sce
effects. Consider a hypothetical
particularistic
Research

universalism

and

publication and citation are controlled


criteria. Assume also that
entirely by particularistic
are made
solely
recruiting and tenure decisions
on the basis of research output. By studying only

nario where

one

outcomes,

secondary

for omitted

the study

variables

only a subset of possible


determinants,
raising the potential for bias due to
omitted variables. The question is not whether uni
and par
versalism applies in some circumstances

Most

studies

include

in others, but the relative importance


ticularism
of each in a given setting (Beyer,
1978). Thus,
and par
studies should include both universalistic
their rela
factors in order to assess
ticularistic
tive effect.

instability

Temporal

studies analyze data at a single point in time,


used varying widely across
with the time window
of research productiv
studies. The determinants
(1977), for
ity are not stable over time. Reskin

Most

example, reported different drivers of publications


at 3 and 10 years post degree. Given
the lack
of data for the intervening years, no explanations
could be offered. Inconsistent findings across stud
ies may simply reflect temporal instability. Con
it would be prudent to test for effects
sequently,
across a range of adjacent periods.

would

mistakenly

con

Strong

interrelationships

variables

are unique out


and citation
publication
are
to
tied
each
comes, they
other?i.e.,
publish
for
condition
but insufficient
ing is a necessary
a
citations.
Still, having
large publication
accruing
count does not guarantee having many citations.

While

factors
and universalistic
Similarly, particularistic
and
Field,
1980). Analyti
may covary (Bedeian
are a preferred alternative
cally, structural models
to multiple regression models for determining
such
relationships

represented the apex of univer


have
academe, research outcomes

among

(Rogers

and Maranto,

1989).

this scenario

clude

salism. Within

(Beyer et al.,
and
and Maranto,
1989)
particular
and Long,
1990) criteria. Similarly,

linked with

1995; Rogers
istic (Allison

both universalistic

crite
the bulk of studies link particularistic
and
ria to career outcomes
1987;
(Allison
Long,
Baldi,
1995; Long et ai,
1979), support has also

while

been

identifies four design issues to advance


of universalism
and particularism.

Potential

843

Paradigm

outcomes

Research

been

of the Strategy

criteria (Cable and


for universalistic
A
studies in Table 1
review
of
the
1999).

found

Murray,
Copyright ?

2005 John Wiley

&

Sons,

Ltd.

Statistical

power

and effect sizes

is an issue for studies with limited sam


to
ple size, or with a low ratio of observations
an
for
and
is
alternative
variables,
explanation
In a supplementary
anal
mixed or null findings.
Power

ysis (available from the authors), we used meta


analysis to integrate Table 1(a) articles. Studies of
the effect of universalism
yield an overall effect of
Strat.

Mgmt.

J.,

This content downloaded from 130.115.80.102 on Wed, 1 May 2013 11:15:18 AM


All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

26: 841-854

(2005)

844

B. K. Boyd,
1.

Table

S. Finkelstein

of

Summary

related

Study

and S. Gove

research

Predictors

Sample

Results

outcomes

(a) Research

Allison

Outcomes

and Long

179 job changes

in job prestige

Change

Publications

(1990)

and

citations

article

per

effect

Prestige
positive
on publication

and

citation

2337 journal

Bakanic,
McPhail,
and Simon

Author

and manuscript
editorial
characteristics,

submissions

(1987)
and Fox (1995)

Particularism,
reviewer

submissions

Crane (1967)

1500 authors in

and

Milem,

15,000 university

Berger (1997)

faculty;

use

and

origin,
reviews

and

assessment

amplification
age, doctoral

Affiliation,

9 journals

Reviewer

gatekeeping,
and

style,

selective

Dey,

revisions

and

Current

related

prestige
to acceptance

acceptance

procedures

400 journal

Chanove,

Beyer,

Journal

editor

Limited support for

of

variables

particularism

manuscripts
Editorial
decisions

Characteristics

of

the

individual affected

of blind

editorial

research
Carnegie
classification

Article and book

Quality of PhD and

Publications

Support

publishing

decisions
for

accumulation

advantage.

multiple fields
Longer

a/. (1998)

279

management

current

faculty

affiliation

and

PhD

affiliation

unrelated,

related to both

citations

outcomes
Park

and Gordon

96

Strategy

PhDs

Gender,

(1996)
Pfeffer,

precocity,

Long,

and

Institutional

Institutional

to 18 journals

level of paradigm

editorial

of

predictors
publications
Institutional

Institutional

representation
board
and

on

graduate
both

program

university

contributions

and

Precocity

in

program

graduate
current

Strehl (1977)

Publications

publications

impact

future

factors
in

publications

less developed fields

development

Reskin

238 chemistry
PhDs

(1977)

Precocity,
doctoral

Publications

authorship,
training,

and

and

Outcomes

first job
162 psychology

and

Rogers

Maranto

(1989)

faculty

socialization
Publications

Precocity,
gender,
quality
of degree
and
program,

Secondary

Allison

and

citations

first job
(b)

driven

post

by

both

ability and

citations

factors

Graduate

less

program
than
important

6 years

degree

precocity

outcomes

and Long

274 job changes

(1987)

and

Prestige,
publications,
citations

Job

changes

Prestige
than

more
important
universalistic

factors

Baldi (1995)
Cable

271 sociologists

and Murray

159 management

(1999)

job applicants

Prestige of new job

precocity,
Prestige,
and gender
mentor,
Publication
success,
revisions
and author

Job

order; PhD prestige and


Allison,

and

239 biochemists

McGinnis

of
prestige
and starting

universalistic

and

publications,
Prestige,
citations

Job

Prestige
than

changes

(1979)
Park

criteria

eminence

chairperson
Long,

offers,

offers,
salaries

more
Prestige
important
than precocity
Outcomes
driven
by

more
important
universalistic

factors

and Gordon

96

Strategy

PhDs

Gender,

(1996)

Tenure

prior

publications,
in
program

graduate

Gender

prior
are

publications

where

university

and

of

predictors

tenure

employed

0.13 for publications,


and 0.12 for citations. Stud
ies of particularism
yield lower effects: the aver
is 0.02 for publication,
age effect of particularism
and 0.04 for citations. Total explained
variance
(R2, including
Copyright ?

control

2005 John Wiley

variables)

averages
&

Sons,

0.20

in
Ltd.

studies of the drivers of publication


and 0.28 in
studies of citations. The use of large samples and
more

measurement

sophisticated

factor

submodels?can

help

schemes?e.g.,

address

such prob

lems.
Strat.

Mgmt.

J.,

This content downloaded from 130.115.80.102 on Wed, 1 May 2013 11:15:18 AM


All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

26: 841-854

(2005)

State
of the field

Assessment

does management
fit on the maturity
spec
are
and
what
the
for research
trum,
implications
practices? In the pecking order of paradigm devel
more
are considered
hard
sciences
opment,

Where

(Beyer, 1978; Har


Lodahl
and
1975;
1972; Zucker
Gordon,
gens,
man and Merton,
in
The
social
sciences,
1971).
even
dismiss
less
advanced
turn,
'professional
is one of the
schools.'
Business
administration
schools, along with educa
youngest professional
advanced

than social

sciences

tion and

social work
1973).
(Parsons and Platt,
Pfeffer
(1993) characterizes
manage
Similarly,
ment as being
in a 'pre-paradigmatic
state' by
virtue

of being
less advanced
than psychology,
and
other social sci
economics,
political science,
ences. Management
research would thus appear to
be near the nadir of the paradigm development

of the Strategy

Paradigm

845

as their colleagues
levels of research productivity
do in organizational
behavior and organizational
1999: 307), a con
theory (Wiseman and Skilton,
data reported in
clusion echoed by comparison
use
of management
2.
the
Study
Consequently,
faculty for Study 1 is appropriate for making com
to other fields, and should not bias our
parisons
results.

a study of universalistic
and par
Separately,
at
ticularistic effects is best done
the level of a
scientific community
(Kuhn, 1996). The strategic
is an ideal choice for this
management
community
a
unit of analysis: it has
clearly identified journal
1989), a low level of publica
pool (MacMillan,
tion outside of this pool, sufficient membership
to allow for longitudinal
and longevity
testing,
to the broader
and publication norms generalizable
population of management
faculty.

spectrum.

strategy is one of the youngest


in the immature management
field

In summary,

subspecialties
under the paradigm
(Pfeffer,
1993). Therefore,
we
model
(Kuhn, 1996)
expect (a) strategy fac
to
have lower levels of research output than
ulty
peers in more advanced fields, and (b) research
outcomes
for strategy faculty to be driven more
factors
by particularistic
Therefore we propose:

than universalistic

factors.

norms will
1 : Research productivity
Hypothesis
be lower for management faculty
than for other
disciplines.
Hypothesis
itively

2: Particularistic

Hypothesis
lesser
laristic

to research

related

effect

3: Universalistic
on

research

factors

will be pos

outcomes.

factors

outcomes

will have a
than

STUDY 1
To test Hypothesis
1, we compare average yearly
norms
of management,
and
business,
publication
Data were pro
faculty from all other disciplines.
vided by the Higher Education
Research
Insti
tute (HERI, 1997), a nonprofit university-affiliated
research organization which has conducted annual
since
surveys of teaching activities and outcomes
1989. Data are collected from several hundred uni
are limited to full-time
versities, and respondents
faculty; response rates by individual faculty mem
bers are in the 55-60 percent range. Data were
based on 33,986 respondents;
extensive,
approxi
mately 2300 of these were faculty from schools of
business.

In Figure
management
the pool of
broader pool
survey items

particu

factors.

4: Prolific authors will have more


Hypothesis
citations per article than less prolific authors.

1, we

research norms for


compare
faculty with two other populations:
other business
faculty, and then the
of faculty from all disciplines.
The
to mea
for HERI data are designed

on two discrete
samples and separate
to
test
The
first sample of fac
analyses
hypotheses.
and other disciplines
is used
ulty in management
to test Hypothesis
the second sample of
1, while

sure

2-4.
faculty is used to test Hypotheses
considerations
guided our use of these
different
(1993) critique
samples. First, Pfeffer's
focused explicitly on management.
Second, given
the wealth of subfields in any particular area, finer

across

1 was strongly supported for three


Hypothesis
distinct research norms: total articles published,
articles in the last 2 years, and hours per week
spent on research. The percentage of management

Strat
grained comparisons would be cumbersome.
egy faculty have been found to have comparable

articles
faculty reporting two or fewer published
was 57.5, compared
to 42.8 for other business

We

draw

strategy
Several

Copyright ?

2005 John
Wiley

&

Sons,

Ltd.

ranges

of

variables

vs.

specific

values?e.g.,

were none,
item categories
for publications
we
1-2 articles, etc. Therefore,
report chi-square
statistics in Figure 1 to compare these distributions

the

areas.

Strat.

Mgmt.

J.,

This content downloaded from 130.115.80.102 on Wed, 1 May 2013 11:15:18 AM


All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

26: 841-854

(2005)

B. K. Boyd,

846

S. Finkelstein

and S. Gove

and 34.2 for all disciplines.


faculty
Similarly,
of management
half
(48.9%)
nearly
faculty
reported no articles in the last 2 years, compared
with 35.6 percent for other business
faculty, and
27.2 percent for all disciplines.
These results are
consistent

with Pfeffer's

and strategy
paradigm

critique that management,


is in an early stage of
extension,
by

development.

STUDY 2
Sample
To identify strategy faculty, we used McGraw
Hill's Directory
(Has
Faculty
of Management
of approximately
selback,
1994), a compilation
from over
5000
full-time management
faculty
800 4-year
institutions.
The directory
provides
such as each person's
information,
descriptive
teaching and research specialization,
degree date,
and degree-granting
institution. We included both
teaching and research faculty to avoid an upward
rates (Long et al.,
bias
in productivity
1998;
and Maranto,
excluded
fac
1989). We
Rogers
with
data
for degree date or teach
ulty
missing
doc
faculty without
ing/research
specializations,
were
whose
toral degrees,
and faculty
degrees
awarded before
1970 or after 1990. This yielded
a final sample size of 945 faculty. Supplemen
tal tests indicated that these sampling
introduced no bias to our results.

parameters

Measurement
outcomes

Publishing

in MacMil
We
collected
data on publications
lan's (1989) 14 strategy-oriented
journals for the
inclusive for each of the 945 fac
years 1970-93
a
total
of
13,000 person-years.
ulty;
approximately
A comparison
with other high-quality
journals
and Balkin,
1992) indicated that the
(Gomez-Mejia
list captured over 95 percent of pub
MacMillan
lishing activity by our sample.

Citation

outcomes

We used the Social Science


to collect citation data. We
ent variables based on this
was a cumulative
count of
individual.
Copyright ?

Citations
2005 John Wiley

Citation Index (SSCI)


two differ
constructed
citation data: citations
citations accrued by an

per article

was
&

the ratio of a
Sons,

Ltd.

citations
person's cumulative
of published articles.

to their total number

Universalism
We

measured

universalism
with three indicators.
as having had publi
been
has
defined
Precocity
cations prior to completing
the PhD (Rogers and
this as the count
Maranto,
1989). We measured
1 year of degree com
of articles published within
to allow for lags in publication
time. We
pletion,
two additional measures: whether
then constructed
or not the subject was
on an
the lead author
or
not
and
whether
that
arti
early publication,
in
cle was A-tier quality, defined as membership

MacMillan's

(1989)

set of

'outstanding

quality'

journals.

Particularism
as the prestige of a
measured
particularism
member's
institution using
faculty
degree-granting
three indicators. First, a prominent attribute of elite
is high admission
scores,
programs
management
as the average GMAT score (D'Aveni,
measured
the num
students. Second,
1996) of incoming
ber of editorial
board seats held by a depart

We

ment

used to assess prominence.


Board
are
to
be
assignments
thought
assigned
through
criteria in pre-paradigmatic
fields
particularistic
et al,
coded
1977; Yoels,
(Pfeffer
1974). We
board membership
for each journal in MacMil
lan's (1989) 'outstanding quality' pool by insti
as
Business
Review
Harvard
tution, excluding
it does not have a broad-based
editorial board.
rat
Our third prestige measure was departmental
is often

ings in the Gourman


1999).

report

(Cable

and Murray,

Analysis
for two
using LISREL,
and partic
universalism
ularism are complex constructs,
they are typically
measured
with single indicators. Our use of fac
tor submodels provides greater precision
in tapping
our
these underlying dimensions.
because
Second,
a
are
set
of
simul
variables
interrelated,
dependent
taneous equations
to separate regres
is preferable
sion models, which may misstate
the effects on a

We
tested hypotheses
reasons. First, although

dependent variable. To address temporal


we
our dependent variables as
measured
stability,

particular

Strut.

Mgmt.

J.,

This content downloaded from 130.115.80.102 on Wed, 1 May 2013 11:15:18 AM


All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

26: 841-854

(2005)

State of the Strategy Paradigm

847

?Management
-* -Other
Business
- --All Faculty

None

5-8

9-12

(a)

13-16

17-20

21 +

Hours

-?
Management
a

--

Other

---

None

3-4

5-10

(b)

11-20

21-50

Business

All Faculty

50+

Articles

?
Management
--

None

1-2
(c)

3-4

5-10

Articles

11-20

21-50

Other

Business

All Faculty

50+

or Publications

norms
in academe,
and scholarly
1. Research
and publishing
(a) Hours
per week
spent on research
writing,
Figure
or presented
in last
in academic
and professional
articles
articles
(c) Total
(b) Total
journals,
published
published
are significantly
tests indicate
that 'Management'
distributions
different
from
'Other Business'
2 years. Note:
Chi-square
or 'All Faculty'
at p = 0.01 or greater. All data were provided
Institutional
Research
by the Cooperative
Program
Higher
were
for 'All Faculty'
Los Angeles,
CA. Data
columns
taken from the American
Education
Research
UCLA,
Institute,
College

Teacher,

National

Norms

for

the

1995-96

HERI

Survey,

Other

self-published.

columns

are

based

on

data

provided to the first author by HERI 2/97

years relative to degree date. We report six sets


of structural models,
starting with research out
comes at 5 years post PhD, up through 10 years
post degree.
Copyright ?

2005 John Wiley

&

Sons,

Ltd.

RESULTS
we compared our publi
To assess generalizability,
cation counts against Long and colleagues
(1998),
Strat.

Mgmt.

J.,

This content downloaded from 130.115.80.102 on Wed, 1 May 2013 11:15:18 AM


All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

26: 841-854

(2005)

B. K. Boyd,

848
who
ment

and S. Gove

S. Finkelstein

three articles are needed for the 90th percentile


6 years post degree. For the same year, five articles
mark the 95th percentile,
and seven articles mark

patterns of 279 manage


publication
faculty. They reported a mean of 1.2 articles
=
2.39).
(a
per faculty by 12 years post degree
Data were available at year 12 for 527 members
of our sample, with a corresponding mean publica
norms
tion count of 1.11 (cr= 2.66). Publication
studied

the 99th. By year 10, the gap doubles from that of


year 6. To examine if different journal quality crite
ria affect accumulation, we developed benchmarks
more restrictive pools of 'signifi
for MacMillan's
cant quality' and 'outstanding quality' journals. As

appear to be quite similar across the two groups,


of
thus providing
support for the generalizability
our
statistics
for
full
sample
findings. Descriptive
are reported in Table 2.1
the
As a preliminary
analysis, we calculated

shown in parts (b) and (c) of the table, publication


norms for these two categories are extremely
simi
lar. For an additional point of comparison, we also
for cumulative
developed
longitudinal benchmarks
in
citations, reported
part (d).

for several research out


distributions
percentile
comes, from the year of degree date until 10 years
post PhD. These data are shown in Table 3. In
part (a), we report distributions using the full set of
MacMillan's

Preliminary
models

journal pool. So, for example,

(1989)

Table

2.

Correlation

for structural

evaluated
the factor structure of our mea
surement models prior to testing hypotheses.
Fac
tor loadings for the three-indicator
model
prestige
were
all highly
and in the expected
significant
direction.
did not load on
however,
Precocity,
a common
dimension
lead authorship
and
with
we decomposed
A-tier
variables. Consequently,

and after
before
cohorts:
graduates
of correlations
reported no signifi

universalism

two

into

dimensions:

precocity,

matrix

1
1. Publications:

analysis

We

1
tests indicated that our results are not biased by
Supplemental
data over such a broad time horizon. First, we tested
collecting
over the 21-year period
the stability of paradigm
development
average dissertation
length, an indicator
sampled by studying
indicated no sys
of consensus.
ANO VA (F = 1.12, p = 0.33)
we also analyzed
the
tematic variation across years. Separately,
our variables
between
by divid
relationships
stability among
into two
ing the sample
1980. Pairwise
comparison
cant differences.

factor

year

1.00

10

11

12

13

14

15

1.00

5
2. Citations:

year

0.69

1.00

0.43

0.65

0.95

0.64

0.40

1.00

0.74
0.39

0.83
0.47

0.62
0.81

0.71
0.36

1.00
0.69

7. Publications: year 0.91


10
8. Citations: year 10 0.74
9. Citations per
0.49

0.61

0.35

0.96

0.70

0.33

0.82
0.52

0.49
0.76

0.74
0.49

0.89
0.68

0.47
0.81

0.77
0.50

1.00
0.67

1.00

0.46
0.19
0.37
0.10
0.10
0.18

0.35
0.29
0.42
0.07
0.12
0.19

0.52
0.31
0.47
0.15
0.12
0.20

0.45
0.30
0.42
0.14
0.15
0.25

0.31
0.32
0.35
0.08
0.10
0.20

0.47
0.25
0.40
0.12
0.07
0.13

0.37
0.15
0.37
0.10
0.09
0.17

0.32
0.30
0.38
0.15
0.11
0.24

Mean 0.60 0.82


1.40 3.40
S.D.

0.27
0.95

1.12
0.85
1.28 0.38
1.87 4.46
1.35 2.52

3. Citations

per

article:

year
4. Publications:

1.00

5
year

5. Citations: year 7
6. Citations per
article:

article:

year

1.00

10

year

10. Precocity
11. Lead author
12. A-tier publication
13. GMAT score
14. Gourman rating
15. # Editorial board

0.55
0.34
0.49
0.16
0.13
0.22

1.00
0.54
0.71
0.10
0.07
0.18

1.00
0.65
1.00
0.07 0.10
1.00
0.06 0.09 0.70
1.00
0.08 0.13 0.53 0.61

1.00

0.04
0.20

4.30
0.56

2.33
3.08

26: 841-854

(2005)

seats

Correlations
Copyright ?

of 0.08

or greater

2005 John Wiley

significant

at p =
&

0.05;

Sons,

0.10

or greater
Ltd.

1.86 0.37 0.10


7.22
1.09 0.40

significant
Strat.

at p =

0.05
0.22

625
39

0.01
Mgmt.

J.,

This content downloaded from 130.115.80.102 on Wed, 1 May 2013 11:15:18 AM


All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

State
Table

3.

Cumulative

(a) Publications
Percentile

75th
90th
95th
99th

date

inMacMillan's

ile
ile
ile
ile

Years

inMacMillan's

Percentile

Years

since

degree

Includes 8 journals

date

Journals listed in (c) as well as Sloan Management


Review and California Management Review

(1989)
since

degree

'outstanding quality' strategy journals


date

Includes

10
1
4
6
9

to any

strategy

Years

ile
ile
ile
ile

measured

22

single

lead

2005 John Wiley

and

&

Sons,

date

degree

tions.
Copyright ?

since

0
1

Academy

Science

Journal,
of Management
Business
Harvard
Review,
Review
of Management
Academy
Science,

0
6

with

Management

Administrative

Journal,

Management

and ability,
indicator;
and
A-tier
by
pub
authorship
lications. A confirmatory
factor model
treating
our predictor variables
as three separate dimen
sions reported a x2 of 28.09, and an RMSR of
over
0.04, and was a significant
improvement
both the null and two dimensional
configura

measured

Strategic
Quarterly,

6 journals

articles

Percentile

75th
90th
95th
99th

Studies,
Management
Organizational
Dynamics,
Journal
of Business
Strategy,
Long Range
Planning,
Journal
and Interfaces
of Management,

'significant quality' strategy journals

ile
ile
ile
ile

(d) Citations

Journals listed in (b) and (c) as well as Journal of

10
2
5
8
14

012345678910
0
111111

0
0
0
0
00112233445
01123345567
12234567899

(c) Publications

(1989)

14 Journals

Includes

9
2
5
7
12

Percentile

75th
90th
95th
99th

degree

ile
ile
ile
ile

(b) Publications

75th
90th
95th
99th

(1989) strategy journals


since

Years

849

Paradigm

benchmarks

productivity

inMacMillan's

of the Strategy

Ltd.

14

11

18

23

34

45

70

95

124

33

51

There was

significant
dimensions.

10
1
21
52
151

9
0

covariance

21

across

the three

As

exogenous
expected,
precocity
and ability dimensions
covaried more significantly
= 0.70,
t = 17.2) with each other than with
(0
= 0.10,
0.11, and t = 3.0 and 3.5,
(0
prestige
This
suggests that many PhDs from
respectively).
elite schools do not publish in the first year, and
that those who do are exceptional.
Strat.

Mgmt.

7.,

This content downloaded from 130.115.80.102 on Wed, 1 May 2013 11:15:18 AM


All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

26: 841-854

(2005)

B. K. Boyd,

850

and S. Gove

S. Finkelstein

Supplement?r
analyses indicated that there are
in the incidence
of
small
differences
relatively
vs.
for
of
elite
other
early publications
graduates
institutions. For example, one set of comparisons
scores as
used the 90th percentile
of Gourman
the operational measure of elite institution. Twelve
percent of such graduates were early publishers,

received the least support.


1.0). These hypotheses
was
related to publications
for
Prestige
positively
was
5
the
coefficient
years
through 9, although
path
than for precocity
generally of smaller magnitude
or ability. Additionally,
the link to citations was
small, and significant only for year
consistently
7. None of the paths to citations per article were

as compared
to 8 percent for the remaining pool.
of prestige
Other measures
reported comparable
it would
results. Thus,
appear that early publi
rare event for graduates of
cation is a relatively

significant.
3 stated that universalistic
factors
a
and
would
have
lesser
effect
(precocity
ability)
on research outcomes
than particularistic
factors.
universalistic
factors reported a stronger
However,
effect
than
factors, thereby
empirical
particularistic
the conclusion
that the field
is at
challenging
Hypothesis

both elite and non-elite institutions, suggesting that


and
the faculty precocity construct is conceptually
of
school
pres
independent
graduate
practically
tige, and, hence, is an appropriate measure of uni

a level

was
of paradigmatic
infancy. Precocity
for all
strongly linked to cumulative
publications
six years tested, while
the link for citations was

versalism.

tests

Hypothesis

to expectation,
not supported. Contrary
precocity
was negatively
related to citations per article for
all years tested. In summary, precocious
authors
are more prolific, but tend to write articles that are

are reported
in
Results
the LISREL model
2 stated prestige would
be
Table 4. Hypothesis
linked to research outcomes.
Prestige
positively
was modeled
scores
by the indicators of GMAT
=
= 0.86,
=
t
seats
editorial
board
20.9),
(?
(?
=
=
t
and
0.78,
19.2),
(?
department
reputation
of

4.

Table

Summary

results

of

less influential.
The ability dimension was modeled with
dicators: authorship and A-tier publications.

N for year

771
variable:

?,

Precocity

Ability ?2
Prestige ?,
CED
variable:

Dependent
Path from:

Publications

n{
variable:

Publications
Citations

n2

=
p
Items

0.11
0.06 0.12
0.14** 0.13** 0.06
0.26
0.25
0.21

citations

-0.15**
0.28***

0.39***

Citations

-0.04
0.16**
0.04
0.09*

-0.30*

0.05
0.09
0.02

0.68***0.63***

0.62***

0.60
0.51
article

per

0.36***

-0.06
-0.06
0.09
0.18*
0.03
0.02
0.75***

0.70***

0.61
0.58

0.50

(n3)
-0.13**

-0.10+

-0.22*

0.27***
0.24***
0.04
0.01

0.52***

(n2)

-0.31***

-0.28*

0.91***

0.89***
0.83***

0.52
0.59

0.63

CED
+

0.39***

0.21**
0.22**
0.14***
0.13**
0.28
0.30

0.40***
0.01
r/,

610
565

0.32***
0.35***

-0.23***

?,

Precocity

Ability ?2
Prestige $3

644

0.35***

0.49

Dependent
Path from:

date

0.21**
0.13***
0.31
Cumulative

CED

degree

(^,)

publications

0.37***
-0.01
0.03

Precocity?,
Ability ?2
Prestige ?3

since

685728

Cumulative

Factor

models

longitudinal

Years

Dependent
Path from:

two in

-0.35**

-0.22**

0.33*** 0.53*** 0.48***


0.04
0.01
0.04
-0.05
0.69***

-0.11*
0.74***

0.49

-0.19***

0.66***

0.52
0.47

* =
*** =
** =
0.001
0.10;
0.05;
0.01;
p
p
p
in bold indicate significant
universalistic
effects.

Copyright ?

2005 John Wiley

&

Sons,

Ltd.

Strat.

Mgmt.

J.,

This content downloaded from 130.115.80.102 on Wed, 1 May 2013 11:15:18 AM


All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

26: 841-854

(2005)

State
(r = 21.5) and 1.0, respec
loadings were 0.76
effect of abil
tively. Tests of the universalistic
the
development
paradigm
ity also disputed
Faculty with strong ability reported a
hypothesis.
for years 5 through
link with publications
positive
a
at
link
with
citations
7, and
years 6, 7, and
a
10. Finally,
ability reported
significant
highly
=
link with citations per article for all
0.001)
(p
years

tested.

scholars
4 proposed
that prolific
Hypothesis
on
a
more
be
cited
would
per arti
frequently
This
link was
cle basis?a
effect.
particularistic
a
but
in
direction
for
all
but
year 7,
significant
authors with many pub
contrary to expectation:
to write
less influ
lications tended, on average,
ential articles. These findings are consistent with
the results of Cole and Cole (1971) among hard
on the
and offer supporting evidence
scientists,
our
to
of
universalism
sample.2
applicability
to studies
in Table 1, our model
Compared
in research out
explains more of the variance
more
so
Prior stud
does
and
comes,
efficiently.
and citation explain, on aver
ies of publication
respec
age, 20 and 28 percent of the variance
tively. In contrast, our design yields an R2 of
and 0.50 for citations. These
0.28 for publications
increases in explained variance are accomplished
six to seven for our
using far fewer predictors:
as
to
model,
many as 19 in other stud
compared
of our design would aid future
to address tempo
time periods
studies: multiple
concurrent
and
ral instability,
study of universal
to address omitted variable
ism and particularism
ies. Two

elements

problems.

DISCUSSION
The present study extends prior work by shedding
new light on the productivity
distribution within
new findings
about the
the field and providing
in shaping
and universalism
role of particularism
that distribution. Our results also provide further
insight

into the applicability

of Kuhn's

paradigm

2
we
ran
to expectations,
Because
this finding was
contrary
form
the functional
further tests to see if we had misspecified
of this link. For example,
there might be an increasing marginal
relative to one's visibility
publication
utility of each additional
an author receives much
in the field?i.e.,
greater value from
transformations
their ninth vs. first publication. We ran nonlinear
for multiple
time horizons,
and citations,
in every case these alternate
However,
results than those presented
here.
reported weaker

for both publications


to test this possibility.
models

Copyright ?

2005 John Wiley

&

Sons,

Ltd.

of the Strategy

851

Paradigm

for strategy research. Finally, the study also


highlights and incorporates several methodological

model

advances.

of research

Determinants

productivity

other fields, we find that many


never publish a single
members
strategy faculty
article. Thus, the mantra
'publish or perish' may
in a research-oriented
be applicable
for faculty

Consistent

with

but not for faculty whose employing


environment,
institution places a greater emphasis on teaching
and service. Future research would benefit from an
examination

of

non-research-oriented

outcomes,

their benchmark
levels, and their determinants.
center
Some of our most
interesting findings
in affecting
research
around the role of prestige
outcomes. While
prestige was linked to publica
to cumulative
was
it
unrelated
citation or
tion,
This
that
the partic
citations per article.
suggests
a
ularistic advantage of
prestigious degree is more
limited than previously
thought. Clearly, prestige
is consistent
success?this
facilitates publication
for most of our years sampled, and is actually
a stronger result for particularism
than reported
(1998). Since most man
by Long and colleagues
the
journals are blind reviewed,
is at the
for particularism
opportunity
level. So, perhaps in the case of mixed
or a borderline
author prestige
decision,
agement

greatest
editorial
reviews
can tip

rate for our


the low publication
the scales. Given
cases
a
could trans
small number of
sample, even
is
effect. This conclusion
late into a significant
consistent with Beyer et al. (1995), who reported
that prestige had a positive
effect on the out
come of revise and resubmits, but not on first
draft submissions. Additionally,
Kerr, Tolliver, and
Petree
that
(1977) reported
reputation positively
affected reviewer decisions when author identity
was

known.

and the quality of one's


Downward
mobility
first job may help explain this phenomenon. Most
of equal or
graduates are employed by universities
lower prestige than their doctoral university. Pre
don't have an 'upper
mier institutions, however,
to recruit from, making
of top
graduates
schools most
likely to gain posts at these uni
versities. This scenario may place more pressure
on new faculty, as compared
to those who took
less prestigious
posts. In the short run, the slack
resources provided by an appointment
at an elite
school may facilitate publishing more articles early
tier'

Strat.

Mgmt.

J.,

This content downloaded from 130.115.80.102 on Wed, 1 May 2013 11:15:18 AM


All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

26: 841-854

(2005)

B. K. Boyd,

852

and S. Gove

S. Finkelstein

these slack resources will


in the performance
evalua
tions of these junior faculty. Faculty with strong
those with mod
records are likely to stay, while
est records are likely to leave for a less presti
gious post. Faced with greater teaching demands
and less support for research, this latter group is
a drop in productivity.
The
likely to experience
short-term effect of doctoral institution prestige on
in a career. However,
likely be considered

productivity
helps explain the time delay inherent
in downward mobility.
While prestige may give faculty an edge regard
seems to dissipate
this advantage
ing publication,
to shaping the direction
it comes
of the
when
are
not
cited
field. High-prestige
faculty
simply
either in aggregate or per article. Since
success is partially driven by particu
publication
larism, hiring decisions based on publications may
than previously
be more particularistic
thought. An
and uni
model
integrated
containing particularistic
career
both
research
and
versalistic
and
factors,
answer
outcomes might
this
help
question. As
our findings suggest, the inclusion of only a par

more

often,

tial set of determinants

may

lead

to misleading

results.

challenge
prior work on pre
and
that
suggest
cocity,
ability may be a more
measure.
relevant
While
precocity has a stronger
effect on publications,
ability is a much better pre
Our

results

also

dictor of both citations and citations per article.


Our findings for citations per article demonstrate
that persons with more ability not only write more
articles as well. Cole
articles, but higher-quality
and Cole
had
(1971)
reported that perfectionist
authors?those
who produced relatively few arti
cles?were
the most influential in a study of hard
scientists. In a similar vein, prolific authors in our
sample tended to write papers that were, on aver
age,

less influential.

Is strategy

an immature'

field?

has many attributes of an


Strategic management
consensus
and rela
weak
immature discipline:
In
low levels of productivity.
contrast,
tively
our results cast doubt on the applicability
of
the impor
that emphasizes
the paradigm model
tance of particularistic
in newer fields.
criteria
levels of research productivity
absolute
Although
are low, both the creation and utilization of scien
initial publication
and sub
tific knowledge?i.e.,
sequent citation of articles?adhere
closely to the
Copyright ?

2005 John Wiley

&

Sons,

Ltd.

normative
fer's

model

(1993)

of science.

Pfef

of

overly

critique

Consequently,
the field appears

harsh.

There

is a clear

in these findings:
al
duality
in
other
though scholars produce less research than
areas,

research

outcomes

are driven more

in

strategic

management

by merit-based

than particularis
tic factors. Correspondingly,
strategic management
research has the attributes of both an advanced and
a young discipline.
no other
To our knowledge,
study of paradigm
within
differences

has reported such


development
a single discipline.
Together,
echo arguments
that consensus
is

these findings
a straw man for the social

sciences

(Cannella

and

Paetzold,
1994).
to the hard sciences, manage
When
compared
ment
researchers
have to confront a number of
as a 'professional'
additional
school,
challenges:
are generally aimed at applied
research questions
vs.

(Parsons and Platt,


1973).
pure knowledge
trends play a signifi
Additionally,
practitioner
cant role in shaping lines of inquiry: as execu
tives develop and implement new tools and tactics,
researchers must play 'catch-up' to understand this
continually
changing
landscape. As an analogue,
how would chemistry research be affected if elec
trons spontaneously
to change their pat
decided
terns of affinity and dislike every several years?
At a broader level, research in the hard sciences
as increasingly
characterized
ratio
tests beget new theories, until evi
dence gives rise to even newer theories. Implicit
in this spiral is that the new theories are bet
or
in terms of accuracy,
ter?whether
validity,

is typically
nal?additional

some other metric?than


ever, in a domain where

the ones before. How


our electrons have free

will

and the power of social interaction, the expec


tation of movement
towards one right answer may
be unwarranted.
It is ironic, then, that the notion
of increasing rationalization
for management
practice,
desirable for research.

has long been rejected


is still considered

yet

An alternative

point of view is that management


be
Ritzer
(1975) argues
may
multi-paradigmatic.
that consensus might not extend across scientific
communities
of a given discipline. There are sev
to explore Ritzer's
eral opportunities
hypothesis.
would
be to replicate this analy
starting point
sis across a number of management
subspecialties.

One

Since many of the Academy


of Management
sions vary broadly in size and age, we might
Strat.

Mgmt.

J.,

This content downloaded from 130.115.80.102 on Wed, 1 May 2013 11:15:18 AM


All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

divi
expect

26: 841-854

(2005)

of the Strategy

State
across
to see significant differences
in consensus
divisions.
on the emphasis
an observation
of
Finally,
vs.
citation is warranted. Our results
publication
scholar does
demonstrate
that being a productive
not guarantee
be an influential
that one will
scholar. While citations play a more important role
in perceptions
of departmental
than publications
and
Bollen, 2003), publication vol
quality (Paxton
ume

plays

stronger

role

in areas

such

as

Otto Carroll,
provided
by Sherry Burlingame,
Dave Loney, Sandy Rogers, Christine Cress at the
Institute, and Tuck ref
Higher Education Research
erence librarians. Thanks also to Diana Deadrick,
and Ken G. Smith for their com
John Prescott,
on

ments

REFERENCES
of Management.
of ethical

Academy
ment

Allison

strategy scholars may still squabble about


or methods?the
proper tool to quantify
or
whether
diversification,
agency
theory is the
to evaluate corporate boards, for
best framework
factors leading to the publication
example?the
and subsequent citation of these articles are consis
tent with much more established disciplines,
such
as the hard sciences.
Our results challenge Pfeffer's
critique of man
as
an
and question
immature discipline,
agement
for
the applicability
of Kuhn's
paradigm model
it seems appropriate that
social sciences. Overall,

productivity.

V, McPhail
and

36:

JM.

1978.

Sons,

Ltd.

1987. The

determinants
Ph.D.s:

HS.

on

Review

manuscript
American

process.
of first

academic

1985-1992.

job

Sociological

1980.

Academic

in

stratification

programs:
departmental
prestige
Journal
patterns.
of Management

and
policies
in four
journals
19: 68-88.
Quarterly
Editorial

Sociological
JM, Chanove

Beyer

and

process
to AMJ.

the

Fox WB.
1995.
RG,
fates
of manuscripts

Academy

among
fields.

practices
scientific
The

review
submitted

Journal

of Management

38(5):

1219-1260.
versus
B.
1999. Tournament
DM,
spon
Murray
as determinants
success.
of job search
sored mobility
Journal
439-449.
42(4):
Academy
of Management

Cable

AA
RL.
1994.
Jr, Paetzold
the advancement
of organizational
Review
of Management
Academy

Cannella

Cole

Cole

JR,

Cole

S.

Index.

S, Cole

JR.

Pfeffer's
science:

rejoinder.
331-341.
of
quality
the Science

American

6: 23-29.

1967.

and

Sociologist
Scientific
output
the
of
operation

in the
study
in science.
American

Sociological

to

barrier

19(2):
the
Measuring
in the use of
problems

1971.

research:

sociology
Citation

recognition:
reward
system
Review
32(3):

377-390.
D.

some factors
The gatekeepers
of science:
the selection
of articles
for scientific
journals.

1967.

RA.

4: 195-201.
Sociologist
1996. A multiple-constituency,
to interorganizational
mobility

status-based

Organization

of faculty
and
schools.
among
top business
competition
Science
166-189.
7(2):

Dey EL, Milem

JF, Berger JB. 1997. Changing patterns

approach

&

RJ.

scientific

leading

input-output

2005 John
Wiley

effects

6(2): 99-115.
Beyer

D'Aveni

Copyright ?

52:

777-789.

Field

affecting
American

support for this project was generously


Institute at
provided by the Seidman Research
State University
and the Amos
Tuck
Arizona
Data
Dartmouth
School,
support was
College.

Simon

C,

decision-making
52: 631-642.
Review

graduate management
and faculty
hiring

Crane

Financial

of

mobility
Review

469-478.

Quarterly
Bedeian
AG,

theories

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Departmental
American
Sociological

Sociological
Baldi
S. 1995. Prestige
for new
sociology

while

is the strat

1990.

JS.

Long

review

outcomes
for strategy fac
ferent story. Research
and citations?are
shaped
ulty?both
publications
than particularistic
much more by universalistic
factors. Such a result is the hallmark of a very
mature discipline
(Kuhn, 1996; Parsons,
1939). So,

of Manage

Academy

643-652.

Bakanic

less productive
are, on average,
this
in other disciplines. While
finding is consistent with Pfeffer's critique regard
as a field of
ing the immaturity of management
our
structural models
portray a very dif
study,

of Manage

Academy

JS.
1987.
Long
Interuniversity
American
scientists.
Sociological

PD,
academic

55:

Strategy faculty
than their peers

conduct.

ment Journal 41(6): 736-739.

PD,
scientific

CONCLUSION

1998.

code

Allison

faculty.

to the question
'How mature
is 'It depends.'
egy paradigm?'

drafts.

previous

career

(Allison and Long, 1987) and faculty pay


mobility
and Balkin,
1992). This inconsis
(Gomez-Mejia
intend to reward
tency suggests that, if universities
to
contributions
citations should play
knowledge,
a stronger role in the selection and evaluation of

the answer

853

Paradigm

of publication
institutional

productivity:
isomorphism?

accumulation
Sociology

or

advantage
of Education

70:

26: 841-854

(2005)

308-323.
Strat.

Mgmt.

J..

This content downloaded from 130.115.80.102 on Wed, 1 May 2013 11:15:18 AM


All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

B. K. Boyd,

854

S. Finkelstein

Floyd SW, SchroederDM,


I'm

first

author':

1994.

over

in management
Journal
37(3):

credit

of Management

pay:

Balkin
LR,
an agency

DB.

1992.

theory

Determinants

LL.

1975.

Comparative
The
Fields,

of

of

A
Research:
of Scientific
in Three
of Research
Scientific
and Caroline
Rose
Monograph
Association:

Sociological

Washing

ton, DC.
1994.

The

1993-1994.

to

the first

D.

1978.
West:

Kuhn

TS.

J, Petree
influence

1996.

The

JB, Gordon
fields
and
the

D.

longitudinal

assessment

sociology

and
journals
25: 4-27.

and

social

1973.

The

17(2):
structure.

American

Press:

University.
MA.

Cambridge,
Perceived
2003.

to

Barrier

science:

the

paradigm

variable.

Pfeffer

J, Long

and

and

quality

sociol

ratings:
Sociology

advance

of

of

organiza
a depen

as

development

Review

of Management

Academy

Sociologist

Jour

of Management

Academy

18(4):

BF.

Ritzer

of Chicago Press: Chicago,


structure

The

R.
PD, McGinnis
career.
American

Bowers
WP,
Long R,
Research
productivity
effects
of academic

Barnett
of
origin

of Management

Strategic

2005 John Wiley

of

of

1979.

White

T,

into

MC.

Journal

41(6):

development
in
three

publication

Scientific

and
productivity
American
Sociological

the

reward
Review

Sociology:

Sociologist
Maranto

RC,

10:

a multiple
156-167.

CL.

1989.

science.

paradigm
Causal

models

of

Journal

of

Tahai

MJ.
1999. A revealed
A, Meyer
preference
study
of management
direct
influences.
journals'
Strategic
Journal
279-296.
Management
20(3):
RM,

Skilton

PF.

tivity

Divisions

1999.

and

differ

and produc
preferences
subfields.
Journal
of Man

exploring
publication
across management

agement Inquiry 8(3): 299-320.


Yoels

WC.
the

1974.

The

allocation

of

observations

Sociological

1998.

is really

competition
295-329.
Zuckerman

H, Merton

in science:

704-714.

structure
editorship
on
the
15:

Quarterly

Zivney TL, Bertin WJ.

Review

Sociological

Paradigm

publishing productivity in psychology.


Applied Psychology 74(4): 636-649.

IL.

scientific

Entrance

1977.

journal

science.

1975.

ences:

in management:
graduates
and academic
affiliation.

IC. 1989. Delineating

scholars.
policy
391-395.

1977.

Wiseman

1972.

K.

scientific disciplines. Social Forces 55(4): 938-951.

Revolutions

of Scientific

Strehl

A,

particularism:

Rogers

816-830.

Copyright ?

GM.

1993.

J.

tional

strategic

Journal

in graduate
department
and economics.
science,
ogy,
political
76: 71-88.
Education

some

JS, Allison
the academic

MacMillan

P,

of

Management

professions

records

field

42: 491-504.

Journal

1977. Manuscript
character
for management
and

Structure

(ISI). 2002.

of
functioning
university
graduate
American
Review
37:
Sociological

departments.
57-72.

Academy

Science

Publication
the

methodology

structure

acceptance

journals.
132-141.

(3rd edn). University

44:

Paxton

American

in prominent
American
prestige.

Lodahl

Long

The

Platt

Los

Formulation:
Strategy
St Paul, MN.

Inquiry

science
20:

in science.

17(4): 457-467.

University
Bollen
KA.

1997.

February
UCLA:
Institute,

Reports.
Self-published.
Babchuk
N.
1994. A

productivity

social

1939.

T,
Harvard

1996.
in

Strategic

Parsons

Reskin

Concepts.

departmental
Kerr S, Tolliver
istics which
nal

T.

dent

HERI Faculty

author

Research

Schendel

Analytical

B,

ME.

decisions

management.
109-128.

of

CA.

Institute for Scientific


Citation

effect

599-620.

provided
Education

Higher

of

Directory
McGraw-Hill:

1997. Data from the 1995-1996

Angeles,
Hofer
CW,

Keith

McGraw-Hill

Faculty,

Management
New
York.

Survey,

tenure

Pfeffer
Jr.

The Matthew

Gordon

SH,

Social Forces

prestige

Sociology

1968.

56-63.

Parsons
the

and

Patterns

Analysis
Arnold

American

Hasselback

HERI.

RK.

Park

Journal 35(5): 921-955.

of Management

Series.

Merton
159:

Academy

perspective.

WO.
1971.
outputs,
Hagstrom
Inputs,
of
science
university
departments.
44: 375-397.
Education
Hargens

'Only if

and

Gomez-Mejia
faculty

Finn DM.

conflict

Academy

scholarship.
734-747.

and S. Gove

the referee

of

scientific

on

fields

scientific
of

politics
264-276.

and

journals:
knowledge.

1992. Publish or perish: what the


Journal

doing.
RK.

1971.

of Finance

Patterns

structure

institutionalism,
system. Minerva

of
and

47(1):

evaluation
functions

of

9: 66-101.

a forum for business


Journal

Management

&

Sons,

10(4):

Ltd.

Strat.

Mgmt.

J.,

This content downloaded from 130.115.80.102 on Wed, 1 May 2013 11:15:18 AM


All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

26: 841-854

(2005)