Home > Research > Publications & Outputs > Publication Records of Faculty Promoted to Prof...
View graph of relations

Publication Records of Faculty Promoted to Professor: Evidence from the UK Accounting and Finance Academic Community

Research output: Contribution to journalJournal article

Published

Standard

Publication Records of Faculty Promoted to Professor: Evidence from the UK Accounting and Finance Academic Community. / Beattie, Vivien A.; Goodacre, Alan.

In: Accounting and Business Research, Vol. 42, No. 2, 2012, p. 197-231.

Research output: Contribution to journalJournal article

Harvard

APA

Vancouver

Author

Beattie, Vivien A. ; Goodacre, Alan. / Publication Records of Faculty Promoted to Professor: Evidence from the UK Accounting and Finance Academic Community. In: Accounting and Business Research. 2012 ; Vol. 42, No. 2. pp. 197-231.

Bibtex

@article{00e36290d1a44ef18f863ff2e4efaf8f,
title = "Publication Records of Faculty Promoted to Professor: Evidence from the UK Accounting and Finance Academic Community",
abstract = "This study investigates the publication profiles of 140 accounting and finance faculty promoted to the senior rank of professor at UK and Irish universities during the period 1992 to 2007. On average, approximately 9 papers in Association of Business Schools (ABS) (2008)-listed journals, with 5 at the highest 3*/4* quality levels in a portfolio of 20 outputs are required for promotion to professor. Multivariate analysis provides evidence that publication requirements in terms of ABS ranked journal papers have increased over time, an effect attributed to the government research assessment exercise. There is no evidence that requirements differ for: internal versus external promotion, male versus female candidates; accounting versus finance professors, research intensity of institution peer group; or government research ranking of unit. There is also no evidence of a substitution effect in relation to increased recent publication history, quantity of non-ABS outputs or sole-authorship, all of which show a significant complementary effect. It is noted that there is very limited overlap in the UK and US publication journal sets, suggesting underlying geographically-based paradigm differences. The benchmarks provided in this study are informative in a range of decision settings: recruitment; those considering making an application for promotion to a chair and those involved in promotion panels; cross-disciplinary comparisons; and resource allocation. The evidence presented also contributes to the emerging policy debates concerning the aging demographic profile of accounting faculty, the management of academic labour and the Research Excellence Framework.",
keywords = "faculty, journals , professor , promotion , publication, academic identity, productivity",
author = "Beattie, {Vivien A.} and Alan Goodacre",
year = "2012",
doi = "10.2139/ssrn.1639882",
language = "English",
volume = "42",
pages = "197--231",
journal = "Accounting and Business Research",
issn = "0001-4788",
publisher = "Routledge",
number = "2",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Publication Records of Faculty Promoted to Professor: Evidence from the UK Accounting and Finance Academic Community

AU - Beattie, Vivien A.

AU - Goodacre, Alan

PY - 2012

Y1 - 2012

N2 - This study investigates the publication profiles of 140 accounting and finance faculty promoted to the senior rank of professor at UK and Irish universities during the period 1992 to 2007. On average, approximately 9 papers in Association of Business Schools (ABS) (2008)-listed journals, with 5 at the highest 3*/4* quality levels in a portfolio of 20 outputs are required for promotion to professor. Multivariate analysis provides evidence that publication requirements in terms of ABS ranked journal papers have increased over time, an effect attributed to the government research assessment exercise. There is no evidence that requirements differ for: internal versus external promotion, male versus female candidates; accounting versus finance professors, research intensity of institution peer group; or government research ranking of unit. There is also no evidence of a substitution effect in relation to increased recent publication history, quantity of non-ABS outputs or sole-authorship, all of which show a significant complementary effect. It is noted that there is very limited overlap in the UK and US publication journal sets, suggesting underlying geographically-based paradigm differences. The benchmarks provided in this study are informative in a range of decision settings: recruitment; those considering making an application for promotion to a chair and those involved in promotion panels; cross-disciplinary comparisons; and resource allocation. The evidence presented also contributes to the emerging policy debates concerning the aging demographic profile of accounting faculty, the management of academic labour and the Research Excellence Framework.

AB - This study investigates the publication profiles of 140 accounting and finance faculty promoted to the senior rank of professor at UK and Irish universities during the period 1992 to 2007. On average, approximately 9 papers in Association of Business Schools (ABS) (2008)-listed journals, with 5 at the highest 3*/4* quality levels in a portfolio of 20 outputs are required for promotion to professor. Multivariate analysis provides evidence that publication requirements in terms of ABS ranked journal papers have increased over time, an effect attributed to the government research assessment exercise. There is no evidence that requirements differ for: internal versus external promotion, male versus female candidates; accounting versus finance professors, research intensity of institution peer group; or government research ranking of unit. There is also no evidence of a substitution effect in relation to increased recent publication history, quantity of non-ABS outputs or sole-authorship, all of which show a significant complementary effect. It is noted that there is very limited overlap in the UK and US publication journal sets, suggesting underlying geographically-based paradigm differences. The benchmarks provided in this study are informative in a range of decision settings: recruitment; those considering making an application for promotion to a chair and those involved in promotion panels; cross-disciplinary comparisons; and resource allocation. The evidence presented also contributes to the emerging policy debates concerning the aging demographic profile of accounting faculty, the management of academic labour and the Research Excellence Framework.

KW - faculty

KW - journals

KW - professor

KW - promotion

KW - publication

KW - academic identity

KW - productivity

U2 - 10.2139/ssrn.1639882

DO - 10.2139/ssrn.1639882

M3 - Journal article

VL - 42

SP - 197

EP - 231

JO - Accounting and Business Research

JF - Accounting and Business Research

SN - 0001-4788

IS - 2

ER -