3,680 research outputs found
Portfolio Planning Methods: Faulty Approach or Faulty Research? A Rejoinder to 'Making Better Decisions' by Wensley
No full textWensley (1994) makes three key points. First, it is worthwhile to conduct empirical studies of the value of management techniques. Second, managers probably misuse portfolio methods. Third, the Armstrong and Brodie study is flawed. We agree with all three points.marketing, portfolio planning methods
Peer Review for Journals: Evidence on Quality Control, Fairness, and Innovation
No full textI reviewed the published empirical evidence concerning journal peer review, which consisted of 68 papers, all but three published since 1975. Peer review improves quality, but its use to screen papers has met with limited success. Current procedures to assure quality and fairness seem to discourage scientific advancement, especially important innovations, because findings that conflict with current beliefs are often judged to have defects. Editors can use procedures to encourage the publication of papers with innovative findings such as invited papers, early-acceptance procedures, author nominations of reviewers, results-blind reviews, structured rating sheets, open peer review, and, in particular, electronic publication. Some journals are currently using these procedures. The basic principle behind the proposals is to change the decision from whether to publish a paper to how to publish itpeer review, journals, publications
The Value of Surprising Findings for Research on Marketing
No full textIn the work of Armstrong (Journal of Business Research, 2002), I examined empirical research on the scientific process and related these to marketing science. The findings of some studies were surprising. In this reply, I address surprising findings and other issues raised by commentators.marketing, marketing research
The Value of Formal Planning for Strategic Decisions: A Reply
No full textIn Armstrong (1982a), I examined alternative explanations to the empirical findings that supported the use of formal planning. In considering the possibility that researcher bias might lead to such results, I used Terpstra’s (1981) evaluation scheme. Based on this test, poor methodology did not seem responsible for the conclusions on the value of formal planning.formal planning, strategic decisions
Incentives for Developing and Communicating Principles: A Reply
No full textThe commentators raised many interesting ideas in response to Armstrong and Pagell (2003), from which one general theme emerges: The commentators claim that management science lacks the incentives to encourage efforts to develop and communicate grounded principles. As a result, academics often conduct their research as an intellectual exercise with little concern as to whether their findings might eventually be of any practical use. The problem extends beyond management science. Smith (1991), an editor of the British Medical Journal, concluded from a review that only about 15 percent of medical interventions are supported by solid scientific evidence. He attributes this disconnect to an estimate that only about one percent of articles in medical journals are scientifically sound. Such results indicate problems with incentives in research.incentives, communication, principles
Discovery and Communication of Important Marketing Findings: Evidence and Proposals
No full textMy review of empirical research on scientific publication led to the following conclusions. Three criteria are useful for identifying whether findings are important: replication, validity, and usefulness. A fourth criterion, surprise, applies in some situations. Based on these criteria, important findings resulting from academic research in marketing seem to be rare. To a large extent, this rarity is due to a reward system that is built around subjective peer review. Rather than using peer review as a secret screening process, using an open process likely will improve papers and inform readers. Researchers, journals, business schools, funding agencies, and professional organizations can all contribute to improving the process. For example, researchers should do directed research on papers that contribute to principles. Journals should invite papers that contribute to principles. Business school administrators should reward researchers who make important findings. Funding agencies should base decisions on researchers' prior success in making important findings, and professional organizations should maintain web sites that describe what is known about principles and what research is needed on principles.marketing, marketing findings
Barriers to Scientific Contributions: The Author’s Formula
No full textRecently I completed a review of the empirical research on scientific journals (Armstrong 1982). This review provided evidence for an “author’s formula,” a set of rules that authors can use to increase the likelihood and speed of acceptance of their manuscripts. Authors should: (1) not pick an important problem, (2) not challenge existing beliefs, (3) not obtain surprising results, (4) not use simple methods, (5) not provide full disclosure, and (6) not write clearly. Peters & Ceci (P&C) are obviously ignorant of the author’s formula. In their extension of the Kosinski study (Ross 1979; 1980), they broke most of the rules. Why, then, is P&C’s paper being published? In my search for an explanation, I learned the following from Peters: (a) After a long delay, the paper was rejected by Science, with advice that it would be appropriate for the American Psychologist. (b) After a long delay, the paper was rejected by the American Psychologist. This history illustrates the predictive power of the author’s formula. Submission was meanwhile encouraged by the editor of the Behavioral and Brain Sciences – a journal specializing in peer interaction on controversial papers – and, after a final round of major revision, the paper was accepted for publication. In this commentary, I describe how P&C violated many rules in the author’s formula. It may be too late to salvage their careers, but the discussion should be instructive to other authors.barriers, scientific contriution, publication
Publishing Standards for Research in Forecasting (Editorial)
No full textWhen we first began publication of the Journal of Forecasting, we reviewed policies that were used by other journals and also examined the research on scientific publishing. Our findings were translated into a referee's rating form that was published in the journal [Armstrong (1982a)]. These guidelines were favorably received. Most referees used the Referee's Rating Sheet (Exhibit 1 provides an updated version) and some of them wrote to tell us that they found it helpful in communicating the aims and criteria of the journal.publishing standards, research, forecasting
Research on Scientific Journals: Implications for Editors and Authors
No full textA review of editorial policies of leading journals and of research relevant to scientific journals revealed conflicts between 'science' and 'scientists.” Owing to these conflicts, papers are often weak on objectivity and replicability. Furthermore, papers often fall short on importance, competence, intelligibility, or efficiency. Suggestions were made for editorial policies such as: (1) structured guidelines for referees, (2) open peer review, (3) blind reviews, and (4) full disclosure of data and method. Of major importance, an author's “Note to Referees” (describing the hypotheses and design, but not the results) was suggested to improve the objectivity of the ratings of importance and competence. Also, recommendations are made to authors for improving contributions to science (such as the use of multiple hypotheses) and for promoting their careers (such as using complex methods and obtuse writing).scientific journals, authors, research, editors
Chosen logistics processes in Škoda JS
No full textThis master thesis deals with the purchase and sale process in Škoda JS company. The aim of this work is to assess whether the setting of the purchase and sale process is met by the company also within a real business case, in compliance with set controls, and whether the degree of perfect delivery is sufficient. In the introduction, the author specifies the basic terms: logistics, logistic chain, customer benefits, information systems in logistics, buying and selling. The following chapter introduces Škoda JS company, including the sphere of its entrepreneurial activity. This chapter also deals with the nuclear power industry. In the crucial chapter, the author describes the process of purchase and sale in Škoda JS company and compares it with a real business case. In conclusion, the author evaluates discrepancies and suggests recommendations to avoid them
- …
