Beyond research excellence: A proposal for complementary evaluative practices in management and organisation studies

Abstract

In this essay, we question evaluative practices concerning ‘scientific excellence’ as solely captured in so-called ‘A journals’, because they can entail a disconnection between the measure and its contents. Where this occurs, we start writing for our own immediate ‘survival’ and long-term social standing among our peers. Along the way, however, there is a risk that we lose sight of what ‘meaningful’ research can feel and look like. While research must be reliable or trustworthy, we advocate the use of complementary evaluative practices that involve learned societies, along with employee or employer-focused organisations and their assessment of the meaningfulness of published research in their respective contexts. Our proposal (a) encourages diverse forms of research contribution, (b) enables researchers to develop a collaborative approach that supports engagement and dialogue between researchers and the appropriate audiences for their work and (3) ensures that the impact of research can be developed more intentionally after publication.

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 — 12 citations exist upstream.

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