Search

This study examines the question of whether the journal ranking VHB-JOURQUAL 2 can be considered as a good measure for the construct ”scientific quality„. Various rankings in business research provide the database for the analysis. The correlations between theses rankings are used to assess the validity of VHBJOURQUAL 2 along various validity criteria. The correlations with rankings that measure the same construct based on different methods show that VHB-JOURQUAL 2 has acceptable, but moderate convergent validity. The validity varies considerably across disciplines, showing that the heterogeneity of business administration is not sufficiently represented by this overall ranking. The variability is related to the variation in members per discipline represented by the German Association for Business Research. Furthermore, the measure shows a weak correlation with acceptance rates as an indicator of nomological validity in some disciplines.

VHB-JOURQUAL represents the official journal ranking of the German Academic Association for Business Research. Since its introduction in 2003, the ranking has become the most influential journal evaluation approach in German-speaking countries, impacting several key managerial decisions of German, Austrian, and Swiss business schools. This article reports the methodological approach of the ranking’s second edition. It also presents the main results and additional analyses on the validity of the rating and the underlying decision processes of the respondents. Selected implications for researchers and higher-education institutions are discussed.

Although reciprocity is fundamental to all social orders, management research offers few reviews of the concept’s theoretical origins and current applications. To help bridge this gap, we elucidate the dominant understandings of reciprocity, ask which areas of research emerge from them, and explore how they interconnect. Our bibliometric methodology detects four clusters of management research on reciprocity. Across these clusters, authors subscribe mainly to substantialist ontology, marginalize morally oriented motives consistent with relational ontology, and largely assume that benefit-oriented motives underlie reciprocity. We outline the advantages of a moral-oriented relationalist concept of reciprocity and discuss potential areas for its development in management research.

This paper reviews research findings on entrepreneurial top management teams within the last 20 years. It concentrates on team-based management factors and their influence on a new venture’s growth and ability to raise capital. This paper integrates recent findings and provides an overview of the current state of research. Moreover, it contributes to the overall topic by proposing five clusters of major team-specific influences, derives determinants of success and failure, and reveals recommendations for further research.