THE EXPECTATIONS AND SATISFACTION LEVELS OF ACADEMIC JOURNALS EDITORS IN THEIR RELATIONSHIPS WITH UNIVERSITIES
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.19094/contextus.v13i1.675Keywords:
Stakeholders. Stakeholder theory. University. University management. satisfaction. Needs. Expectations. Academic journal editors. ISI.Abstract
From the perspective of the Stakeholder Theory, the objective of this paper was to, initially, identify and classify by importance the expectations of editors from scientific journal that are indexed in ISI about its relationship with the universities. After that, the objective was to measure the satisfaction levels of the same editors as to its relationship with universities in general. 276 answers were obtained and the results showed that the satisfaction of the editors with the universities comes from the offer, by the universities, of the adequate facilities for research, including scientific research in the degree programs, encouragement for having and funding scientific events at the university, and of the encourage by the university for their students to participate in research projects.
References
ALTBACH, P. Peripheries and centers: research universities in developing countries. Asia Pacific Education Review, v. 10, n. 1, p.15-27, 2009.
BALDRIDGE, J. Organizational characteristics of colleges and universities. In J. Baldrige, T. Deal (Eds.). The dynamics of organizational change in education, 2. ed. Berkeley: McCutchan Publishing, p. 43-66, 1983.
BALDWIN, L. Total quality management in higher education: the implications of internal and external stakeholders perceptions. PhD Thesis, Graduate School in Business Administration, New Mexico State University, Las Cruces, USA, 2002.
BEACH, S. Sustainability of network governance: stakeholder influence. In: K. Brown, M. Mandell, C. Furneaux, S. Beach, S. (Eds.). Proceedings Contemporary Issues in Public Management: The Twelfth Annual Conference of the International Research Society for Public Management (IRSPM XII), Brisbane, Australia, p. 1-23, 2008.
BERTRAND, D., BUSUGUTSALA, G. Organisation of first-cycle teaching at university: models and issues. Higher Education Management, v. 10, n. 3, p. 109-136, 1998.
BLACKMORE, P., BLACKWELL, R. Strategic leadership in academic development. Studies in Higher Education, v. 31, n. 3, p. 373-387, 2006.
BOK, D. Universities in the marketplace: the commercialization of higher education. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 2003.
BRYDE, D.; LEIGHTON, D. Improving HEI productivity and performance through project management, Educational Management, Administration & Leadership, v. 37, n. 5, p. 705-721, 2009.
BRYSON, J. What to do when stakeholders matter? Public Management Review, v. 6, n. 1, 21-53, 2004.
CLARKSON , M. A stakeholder framework for analysing and evaluating corporate social performance. Academy of Management Review, v. 20, n. 1, p. 92-117, 1995.
CLEMENT, R. The lessons from stakeholder theory for U.S. business leaders. Business Horizons, v. 48, n.1, p. 255-264, 2005.
CONWAY, T.; MACKAY, S.; YORKE, D. Strategic planning in higher education: who are the customers? International Journal of Educational Management, v. 8, n. 6, p. 29-36, 1994.
CUMMINGS, J. Contextualised performance: reframing the skills debate in research education. Studies in Higher Education, v. 35, n. 4, p. 405-419, 2010.
CUMMINGS, J.; DOH, J. Identifying who matter: mapping key players in multiple environments. California Management Review, v. 42, n. 2, p. 83-104, 2000.
DONALDSON, T.; PRESTON, L. The stakeholder theory of the corporation: concepts, evidence and implications. Academy of Management Review, v. 20, n. 1, p. 65-91, 1995.
DOYLE, L. The Role of Universities in the ‘Cultural Health’of their Regions: universities' and regions' understandings of cultural engagement. European Journal of Education, v. 45, n. 3, p. 466-480, 2010.
EVAN, W.; FREEMAN, R. A stakeholder theory of the modern corporation: Kantian capitalism. In T. Beauchamp, N. Bowie (Eds.). Ethical theory and business, 2 ed. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, p. 75-84, 1988.
FREEMAN, R. Strategic management: a stakeholders approach. Boston: Pitman, 1984.
FREEMAN, R.; REED, D. Stockholders and stakeholders: a new perspective on corporate governance. California Management Review, v. 25, n. 3, p. 93-104, 1983.
FRIEDMAN, A.; MILES, S. Stakeholders: theory and practice. Oxford: Oxford University press, 2006.
FROOMAN, J. Stakeholders influence strategies. Academy of Management Review, v. 24, n. 2, p. 191-205, 1999.
GARVER, M. Best practices in identifying customer-driven improvement opportunities. Industrial Marketing Management, v. 32, n. 1, p. 455-466, 2003.
HAIR JR., J.; BABIN, B.; MONEY, A.; SAMOUEL, P.. Essentials of business research methods. New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons, 2003.
HALLINGER, P.; SNIDVONGS, K. Educating leaders: Is there anything to learn from business management? Educational Management, Administration & Leadership, v. 36, n. 1, p.9-31, 2008.
ISI - Institute for Scientific Information, Journal Citation Reports. Avaliable at: http://admin-apps.isiknowledge.com/JCR/JCR?SID=U19@gJlC5mgGCOCI5IG. Accessed: 10 abr. 2010.
JONES, J.; RANSON, S. Reconfiguring the governance of schools in England. Management in Education, v. 24, n.1, p. 7-13, 2010.
JONES, T.; WICKS, A. Convergent stakeholder theory. Academy of Management Review, v. 24, n. 2, p. 206-221, 1999.
JONGBLOED, B.; ENDERS, J.; SALERNO, C. Higher education and its communities: interconnections, interdependencies and research agenda. Higher Education, v. 56, n. 1, p. 303-324, 2008.
LAI, K. Market orientation in quality-oriented organizations and its impact on their performance. International Journal of Production Economics, v. 84, n. 1, p. 17-34, 2003.
LAŽETIĆ, P. Managing the Bologna Process at the European Level: institution and actor dynamics. European Journal of Education, v. 45, n. 4, p. 549-562, 2010.
LEBAS, M. Performance measurement and performance management. International Journal of Production Economics, v. 41, n.1-3, p. 23-35, 1995.
LIMA, E.; COSTA, S.; FARIA, A. Taking operations strategy into practice: developing a process for defining priorities and performance measures. International Journal of Production Economics, v. 122, n. 1, p. 403-418, 2009.
MARGINSON, S.; CONSIDINE, M. The enterprise university: power, governance and reinvention in Australia. Melbourne: Cambridge University Press, 2000.
MEEK, L. The changing landscape of higher education research policy in Australia. In: L. Meek, C. Suwanwela (Eds.). Higher education, research, and knowledge in the Asia-Pacific region, p. 65-90. New York: Macmillan.
MELLAT-PARAST, M.; DIGMAN, L. Learning: the interface of quality management and strategic alliances. International Journal of Production Economics, v. 114, n. 2, p. 820-829, 2008.
MITCHELL, R.; AGLE, B.; WOOD, D. Toward a theory of stakeholder identification and salience: defining the principle of who and what really counts. Academy of Management Review, v. 22, n. 4, p. 853-858, 1997.
MITROFF, I. Stakeholders of the organization mind. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1983.
MORLEY, L. Quality and power in higher education. Philadelphia: SRHE and Open University Press, 2003.
MORRISON, K. Complexity theory, school leadership and management: Questions for theory and practice, Educational Management, Administration & Leadership, v. 38, n. 3, p. 374-393, 2010.
NEAVE, G. The universities’ responsibilities to society. Oxford: Pergamon, 2000.
NEVILLE, B.; BELL, S.; MENGÜÇ, B. Corporate reputation, stakeholders and the social performance-financial performance relationship. European Journal of Marketing, v. 39, n. 9-10, p. 1184-1198, 2005.
PATHAK, V.; PATHAK, K. Reconfiguring the higher education value chain. Management in Education, v. 24, n. 4, p. 166-171, 2010.
PFEFFER, J.; SALANCIK, G. The external control of organizations: a resource dependence perspective. New York: Harper and Row, 1978.
PINSKI, G.; NARIN, F. Citation influence for journal aggregates of scientific publications: theory, with application to the literature of physics. Information Processing and Management, v. 12, n. 5, p. 297-312, 1976.
PLENDER, J. A stake in the future: the stakeholding solution. London: Nicholas Brealey, 1997.
POLONSKY, M. A stakeholder theory approach to designing environmental marketing strategy. The Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing, v. 10, n. 3, p. 29-37, 1995.
PÖSCHL, U. Interactive journal concept for improved scientific publishing and quality assurance. Learned Publishing, v. 17, n. 1, p. 105-113, 2004.
POST, J.; PRESTON, L.; SACHS, S. Managing the extended enterprise: the new stakeholder view. California Management Review, v. 45, n. 1, p. 6-28, 2002.
PRESTON, L.; DONALDSON, T. Stakeholder management and organizational wealth. Academy of Management Review, v. 24, n. 4, p. 619-620, 1999.
REID, K. Management of school attendance in the UK: A strategic analysis, Educational Management, Administration & Leadership, v. 38, n. 1, p. 88-106, 2010.
ROSA, M.; AMARAL, A. A self-assessement of higher education institutions from the perspective of the EFQM excellence model. In: D. Westerheijden, B. Stensaker, M. Rosa (Eds.). Quality assurance in higher education: trends in regulation, translation and transformation. Dordrecht: Springer, p. 181-207, 2007.
ROWLEY, J. Retention: rhetoric or realistic agendas for the future of higher education. International Journal of Educational Management, v. 17, n. 6, p. 248-253, 2003.
ROWLEY, T. Moving beyond dyadic ties: a network theory of stakeholder influences. Academy of Management Review, v. 22, n. 4, p. 887-910, 1997.
SAN ANTONIO, D.; GAMAGE, D. Building trust among educational stakeholders through Participatory School Administration, Leadership and Management. Management in Education, v. 21, n. 1, p. 15-22, 2007.
SAVAGE, G.; DUNKIN, J.; FORD, D. Responding to a crisis: a stakeholder analysis of community health organizations. Journal of Health and Human Services Administration, v. 6, n. 4, p. 383-414, 2004.
SCOTT, S.; LANE, V. A stakeholder approach to organizational identity. Academy of Management Review, v. 25, n. 1, p. 43-62, 2000.
SIRGY, M. Measuring corporate performance by building on the stakeholders model of business ethics. Journal of Business Ethics, v. 35, n 3, p. 143-162, 2002.
TOLLEY, J.; FLECKNOE, M. Evaluation of an ‘Excellence Cluster’ of schools. Management in Education, v. 17, n. 4, p. 10-13, 2003.
TURNER, T.; MENDIBIL, K.; BITITCI, U.; DAISLEY, P.; BREEN, T. Improving the reliability of the customer order fulfilment process in a product identification company. International Journal of Production Economics, v. 78, n. 1,p. 99-107, 2002.
VIDOVICH, L.; CURRIE, J. Governance and trust in higher education. Studies in Higher Education, v. 36, n. 1, p. 43-56, 2011.
VRIES, J. Assessing inventory projects from a stakeholder perspective: results of an empirical study. International Journal of Production Economics, v. 118, n. 1, p. 136-145, 2009.
WEICK, K. Educational organizations as loosely coupled systems. Administrative Science Quarterly, v. 21, p. 1-19, 1976.
WENNERÁS, C.; WOLD, A. Nepotism and sexism in peer-review. In: M. Wyer, D. Giesman, M. Barbercheck, H. Ozturk, M. Wayne (Eds.). Women, science and technology: a reader in feminist science studies,London: Routledge, p. 46-52, 2001.
WHEELER, D.; SILLANPÄÄ, M. Including the stakeholders: the business case. Long Range Planning, v. 31, n. 2, p. 201-210, 1998.
WITTE, J.; VAN DER WENDE, M.; HUISMAN, J. Blurring boundaries: how the Bologna process changes the relationship between university and non-university higher education in Germany, the Netherlands and France. Studies in Higher Education, v. 33, n. 3, p. 217-231, 2008.
WOLFF, R. The ideal of the university. 3 ed. New Brunswick, New Jersey: Transaction Publishers, 1999.
ZIRGUTIS, V. Organization management assessing stakeholder influence. Research Papers, v. 15, n. 4, p. 1-7, 2008.
ZUCKERMAN, H. The careers of men and women scientists: gender differences in career attainments. In: M. Wyer, D. Giesman, M. Barbercheck, H. Ozturk, M. Wayne (Eds.). Women, science and technology: a reader in feminist science studies. London: Routledge, p. 69-78, 2001.
Downloads
Additional Files
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
The authors, while doing the submission, accept the notice below:
We authors hold the copyright related to our paper and transfer Contextus journal the right for the first publication with a Creative Commons’ international license of the modality Attribution – Non-commercial 4.0, which in turn allows the paper to be shared providing that both the authorship and the journal’s right for initial release are acknowledged.
Furthermore, we are aware of our permission to take part in additional contracts independently for non-exclusive distribution of the version of our work published in this journal (e.g. publishing it in an institutional repository or as a book chapter), while acknowledging both the authorship and the journal’s initial publication.
We also certify that the paper is original and up to this date has not been released in any other journal, Brazilian or of another nationality, either in Portuguese or another language, as well as it has not been sent for simultaneous publication in other journals.
Last, we not only know that plagiarism is not tolerated by Contextus but also certify the paper presents the sources of passages from cited works, including those authored by ourselves.
