Abstract
I am among most scholars I know who take a fairly iterative approach to research. Using inductive and/or deductive reasoning, we take efforts to clarify, amend, and extend what we already know about a particular domain of knowledge. I have thoroughly enjoyed learning about and exploring many of the topics that I have studied during my career, and like many scholars in my field, I have produced a few papers that other scholars who share my research interests have cited in their published work. And while it is nice to know that other scholars in my field believe my work has relevance, it has become increasingly clear that citation counts and similar indices are much too narrow for gauging the impact of our scholarship. Wouldn’t it be nice to know more about the real impact of our work?
This question is not new. Several scholars have voiced concerns about using citation counts and similar impact indices. For example, Aguinis, Shapiro, Antonacopoulou, and Cummings (2014) argued for a “pluralist” model of impact that takes into account the interests of multiple stakeholders, both inside and outside the academy. I applaud this kind of thinking, and encourage all of my academic peers to give a priori consideration to a wide array of interests, starting with our primary stakeholder—the hospitality industry. Research that is guided by industry priorities creates actionable knowledge, and actionable knowledge provides the basis for making better and more informed real-world decisions.
This applied orientation is consistent with the aim and scope of the CQ—to publish articles that provide timely and actionable knowledge for improving hospitality management practice and advancing hospitality research. To meet this objective, and in support a pluralist approach to impact, the CQ will publish papers that clearly and cogently explain: (a) how the focal study addresses an important industry priority; (b) how the topic is connected to existing theory; (c) what we already know about practice and theory; (d) what specifically we do not know; (e) why we need to know what we do not know; and (f) how this study or inquiry will help close the practical and theoretical gaps between what we know and do not know. This type of approach will generate actionable knowledge that gets used, and as such, will have much greater impact than simply producing papers to advance one’s career.
Of course, we also need to change the “A-hit” mentality and reward system that currently pervades higher education, but that is something that can be addressed by a little enlightened leadership in the dean’s office. ☺