A scientometric analysis of the Proceedings of the McMaster World Congress on the Management of Intellectual Capital and Innovation for the 1996‐2008 period
| Date | 16 January 2009 |
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1108/14691930910922860 |
| Pages | 8-21 |
| Published date | 16 January 2009 |
| Author | Alexander Serenko,Nick Bontis,Joshua Grant |
| Subject Matter | Accounting & finance,HR & organizational behaviour,Information & knowledge management |
A scientometric analysis of the
Proceedings of the McMaster
World Congress on the
Management of Intellectual
Capital and Innovation for the
1996-2008 period
Alexander Serenko
Faculty of Business Administration, Lakehead University, Thunder Bay,
Canada, and
Nick Bontis and Joshua Grant
DeGroote School of Business, McMaster University, Hamilton, Canada
Abstract
Purpose – This paper seeks to present a scientometric analysis of the Proceedings of the McMaster
World Congress on the Management of Intellectual Capital and Innovation for the 1996-2008 period in
order to better understand the evolution and identity of the discipline.
Design/methodology/approach – Qualitative and quantitative data analysis techniques were
applied to determine author distribution, country, individual and institutional-level productivity
rankings, and employed methodologies.
Findings – It was found that an average manuscript was written by 1.73 authors. The USA, Canada
and the UK were the three most productive countries, which is consistent with prior KM/IC
productivity research. Most productive institutions were the University of Calgary (Canada),
Polytechnic University of Catalonia (Spain) and Universidad de Oviedo (Spain). The most productive
individuals were James Falconer, Jose Maria Viedma Marti and Scott Erickson. Lotka’s
a
, which
represents the degree of conference delegate retention rate, was established as 2.7. Case studies were
the most frequent method of inquiry, followed by framework development and literature reviews.
Surveys and usage of secondary data were the leading empirical methodologies. Interviews,
laboratory experiments, and field studies were under-represented.
Research limitations/implications – The findings offer valuable insights into the state and
development of the KM/IC discipline and shed some light on its identity.
Practical implications – Scientometric analyses are of primary interest for academic researchers
and therefore the practical implications of this study are limited.
Originality/value – The research reported is among the first to investigate the issue of the KM/IC
discipline identity from a descriptive perspective.
Keywords Conferences,Knowledge management, Intellectualcapital, Data analysis
Paper type Literature review
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at
www.emeraldinsight.com/1469-1930.htm
The authors would like to acknowledge the financial support of the DeGroote Management of
Innovation and New Technology Research Centre as well as the McMaster Undergraduate
Student Research Award.
JIC
10,1
8
Journal of Intellectual Capital
Vol. 10 No. 1, 2009
pp. 8-21
qEmerald Group Publishing Limited
1469-1930
DOI 10.1108/14691930910922860
To continue reading
Request your trial