Search Results

You are looking at 1 - 3 of 3 items for

  • Author or Editor: Hwei-Lan Pao x
Clear All Modify Search

Abstract  

As the major concerns of the university are teaching and research, this paper describes the study of a nation-wide evaluation of research performance in management for 168 universities in Taiwan. In addition to the popular indicators of SCI/SSCI journal publications and citations, the number of projects funded by the National Science Council of Taiwan was used to account for the special characteristic of the field of management. The evaluation was based on individual professors rather than management programs, so that all types of universities, including those without management departments, could be compared. Performances of each university in those three indicators were aggregated by a set of a posteriori weights which were most favourable to all universities in calculating the aggregated score. The results show that public universities, in general, performed better than private ones. Universities with specific missions had comparable performance to general comprehensive ones. Analyses from a set of a priori weights solicited from experts showed that the results of this study are robust to the indicators selected and the weights used.

Restricted access

Abstract

Research performance is difficult to evaluate because most of the criteria are incommensurable, and assessing its improvement over time is even more difficult. This paper assesses the performance improvement in management research in Taiwan between 2006 and 2010 using the Malmquist productivity index (MPI). The criteria for measuring research performance are journal publications, where the journals are classified as SI-, TI-, other international-, and other local-types. While the number of papers has increased for three types and decreased in one, the MPI indicates that the aggregate performance has improved significantly. The areas of management covered in this study are management information systems, production and operations management, and marketing. For all these areas the performance has improved, although the improvement in marketing is insignificant. The assessment sheds some light on the area and category of journals that contribute to the improvement of research performance, and which are useful for setting goals to reach higher levels.

Restricted access
Scientometrics
Authors: Chiang Kao, Hsiou-Wei Lin, San-Lin Chung, Wei-Chi Tsai, Jyh-Shen Chiou, Yen-Liang Chen, Liang-Hsuan Chen, Shih-Chieh Fang and Hwei-Lan Pao

Abstract  

To improve the quality of journals in Taiwan, the National Science Council (NSC) of the Republic of China evaluates journals in the fields of humanities and social sciences periodically. This paper describes the evaluation of 46 management journals conducted by the authors, as authorized by the NSC. Both a subjective approach, with judgments solicited from 345 experts, and an objective approach, with data collected on four indicators: journal cross citation, dissertation citation, authors’ scholastic reputation, and author diversity, were used to make a comprehensive evaluation. Performance in the four indicators were aggregated using weights which were most favourable to all journals, in a compromise sense, to produce the composite indices. The subjective evaluation reflects the general image, or reputation, of journals while the objective evaluation discloses blind spots which have been overlooked by experts. The results show that using either approach alone would have produced results which are misleading, which suggests that both approaches should be used. All of the editors of the journals being evaluated agreed that the evaluation was appropriate and the results are reasonable.

Restricted access