The case for good reviewing

Söderlund, Jonas & Bakker, Rene (2014) The case for good reviewing. International Journal of Project Management, 32(1), pp. 1-6.

View at publisher

Abstract

After some years of remarkable growth, the scholarly field of Project Management (PM) research currently finds itself in a crucial stage of development. In this editorial, we make an analysis of submissions to PM's premier specialty journal, the International Journal of Project Management over the period 2007–2010, and argue that one of the most important ways in which PM research can further evolve is to pay more attention to the mundane, yet important, act of good reviewing — an activity that we believe has received relatively little attention in the PM community thus far.

Let us begin by considering the crucial juncture that, as a scholarly discipline, PM is currently at. On the one hand, the PM research field is characterized by signs of major progress. For one, there has been a strong growth in terms of published output: recent years have seen the publication of three major edited volumes with a central focus on PM, published by top-tier publishers (Cattani et al., 2011, Kenis et al., 2009 and Morris et al., 2011); the PM/temporary organizations literature published in ISI ranked peer-reviewed articles is growing exponentially (Bakker, 2010); and besides some of the long-standing PM specialty journals, the field has recently seen the rise of a number of new journals, including the International Journal of Managing Projects in Business, the International Journal of Project Organisation and Management, and the Journal of Project, Program, and Portfolio Management.

Impact and interest:

2 citations in Scopus
Search Google Scholar™
2 citations in Web of Science®

Citation counts are sourced monthly from Scopus and Web of Science® citation databases.

These databases contain citations from different subsets of available publications and different time periods and thus the citation count from each is usually different. Some works are not in either database and no count is displayed. Scopus includes citations from articles published in 1996 onwards, and Web of Science® generally from 1980 onwards.

Citations counts from the Google Scholar™ indexing service can be viewed at the linked Google Scholar™ search.

ID Code: 56140
Item Type: Journal Article
Refereed: Yes
Keywords: Editorial, Good Reviewing, Peer Review, Project Management
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijproman.2012.11.007
ISSN: 1873-4634
Subjects: Australian and New Zealand Standard Research Classification > COMMERCE MANAGEMENT TOURISM AND SERVICES (150000) > BUSINESS AND MANAGEMENT (150300) > Business and Management not elsewhere classified (150399)
Divisions: Current > Research Centres > Australian Centre for Entrepreneurship
Current > QUT Faculties and Divisions > QUT Business School
Current > Schools > School of Management
Copyright Owner: Copyright 2012 Elsevier Ltd.
Copyright Statement: Licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution; Non-Commercial; No-Derivatives 4.0 International. DOI:
Deposited On: 08 Jan 2013 21:35
Last Modified: 04 Aug 2015 00:18

Export: EndNote | Dublin Core | BibTeX

Repository Staff Only: item control page