اشترك بالحزمة الذهبية واحصل على وصول غير محدود شمرا أكاديميا
تسجيل مستخدم جديدDissension or consensus? Management and Business Research in Latin America and the Caribbean
85
0
0.0
(
0
)
تأليف
Julian D. Cortes
اسأل ChatGPT حول البحث
ﻻ يوجد ملخص باللغة العربية
This study presents longitudinal evidence on the dissension of Management and Business Research (MBR) in Latin America and the Caribbean (LAC). It looks after intellectual bridges linking clusters among such dissension. It was implemented a coword network analysis to a sample of 12,000+ articles published by authors from LAC during 1998-2017. Structural network scores showed an increasing number of keywords and mean degree but decreasing modularity and density. The intellectual bridges were those of the cluster formed by disciplines/fields that tend toward consensus (e.g., mathematical models) and not by core MBR subjects (e.g., strategic planning).
قيم البحث
اقرأ أيضاً
This study aims to comprehend the structure of RIBM (research on innovation in business and management) in China and LAC (Latin America and the Caribbean) via co-word and institutional co-authorship networks using Scopus bibliographic data (1998- 201
8). Multiple Correspondence Analysis and Social Network Analysis were applied. Public institutions are interconnected and generate most of the advances in RIBM. RIBM boards regional and national STi policies permeated by sustainability-related factors. China is focused on IT and knowledge management for supply chain and engineering, while LAC focuses on institutional perspectives for economic development.
China and Latin America (LATAM) are now key players in global research production. This study presents a comparative study on research on innovation in management and decision sciences based on data from Scopus and Web of Knowledge (WoS) between Chin
a and LATAM. Findings showed significant differences between regions regarding journals citation dependent measures, and between the number of authors and journal reputation, public universities have been leading producers, and China showed a particular interest in research topics such as commerce and industry, while LATAM in sustainable development and bio-technology.
Trade and investment between developing regions such as China and Latin America (LATAM) are growing prominently. However, insights on crucial factors such as innovation in business and management (iBM) about both regions have not been scrutinized. Th
is study presents the research output, impact, and structure of iBM research published about China and LATAM in a comparative framework using Google Scholar, Dimensions, and Microsoft Academic. Findings showed i) that iBM topics of both regions were framed within research and development management, and technological development topics, ii) significant differences in output and impact between regions, and iii) the same case for platforms.
This paper introduces LACLICHEV (Latin American Climate Change Evolution platform ), a data collections exploration environment for exploring historical newspapers searching for articles reporting meteorological events. LACLICHEV is based on data col
lections exploration techniques combined with information retrieval, data analytics, and geographic querying and visualization. This environment provides tools for curating, exploring and analyzing historical newspapers articles, their description and location, and the vocabularies used for referring to meteorological events. The objective being to understand the content of newspapers and identifying possible patterns and models that can build a view of the history of climate change in the Latin American region.
To address complex problems, scholars are increasingly faced with challenges of integrating diverse knowledge domains. We analyzed the evolution of this convergence paradigm in the broad ecosystem of brain science, which provides a real-time testbed
for evaluating two modes of cross-domain integration - subject area exploration via expansive learning and cross-disciplinary collaboration among domain experts. We show that research involving both modes features a 16% citation premium relative to a mono-disciplinary baseline. Further comparison of research integrating neighboring versus distant research domains shows that the cross-disciplinary mode is essential for integrating across relatively large disciplinary distances. Yet we find research utilizing cross-domain subject area exploration alone - a convergence shortcut - to be growing in prevalence at roughly 3% per year, significantly faster than the alternative cross-disciplinary mode, despite being less effective at integrating domains and markedly less impactful. By measuring shifts in the prevalence and impact of different convergence modes in the 5-year intervals before and after 2013, our results indicate that these counterproductive patterns may relate to competitive pressures associated with global Human Brain flagship funding initiatives. Without additional policy guidance, such Grand Challenge flagships may unintentionally incentivize such convergence shortcuts, thereby undercutting the advantages of cross-disciplinary teams in tackling challenges calling on convergence.
سجل دخول لتتمكن من نشر تعليقات
التعليقات
جاري جلب التعليقات
سجل دخول لتتمكن من متابعة معايير البحث التي قمت باختيارها
