Measuring Performance Evolution of Academic Journals in Management Science and Operations Research: A DEA-Malmquist Approach

6Citations
Citations of this article
24Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

This paper aims to measure the productivity of academic journals in the field of management science and operations research on the basis of a data envelopment analysis (DEA)-Malmquist approach. Using the empirical results, we make the following findings: (1) Compared with the DEA-CCR (Charnes, Cooper, Rhodes) model, the DEA-BCC (Banker, Charnes, Cooper) model may overestimate the performance of journals with a shorter cited half-life and fewer articles, and may underestimate the performance of journals with a longer cited half-life and more articles; (2) The average performance of journals in the management science and operations research field progressed by 1.8% during 2007–2014, which was a result of the frontier-shift effect; (3) The gap between the best journals on the DEA frontier and the rest of the journals is increasing because the best journals grow relatively faster; (4) High-level journals have made more progress and their performance is more stable, and the difference between high-level journals was also smaller during 2007–2014; and, (5) A higher total factor productivity value corresponds to higher Association of Business Schools rankings for certain journals.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Chen, K., Yang, G., & Khoveyni, M. (2017). Measuring Performance Evolution of Academic Journals in Management Science and Operations Research: A DEA-Malmquist Approach. Journal of Management Science and Engineering, 2(1), 34–54. https://doi.org/10.3724/SP.J.1383.201002

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free