What makes a “research star”? Factors influencing the research productivity of business faculty

Abstract

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to identify factors influencing extremely high or low research productivity for business faculty members. Design/methodology/approach Using data originating from a random sample of 236 faculty members across a wide range of accredited business schools and a web‐based survey, main effects are hypothesized and explored. The authors examine only extreme data points of high (and low) research productivity to focus on high‐performing research “stars.” Findings It is found that research “stars” hold higher academic rank, possess greater time management skills, individually place a high value on research, report higher time available to conduct research, enjoy higher institutional support in the form of graduate assistants and summer research support, have fewer course preparations, and work for departments with a similar priority placed on research. Research limitations/implications The authors found that certain person‐ and situation‐level factors differentiate high and low performing faculty members’ research output. Practical implications The paper has implications for university administrators regarding recruiting, selecting, and managing faculty members’ research performance. Originality/value Research productivity and intellectual contributions continue to dominate much of higher education as a primary measure of faculty members’ success. One area that remains under‐explored in the business literature is what “makes a research star” and, to the contrary, what factors predict extremely low faculty research productivity? Shedding light on this research question provides practical benefits for universities by enabling administrators to better recruit, select, motivate, and develop productive faculty members.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 98 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.