Research productivity of management faculty: job demands-resources approach

Abstract

Purpose

The main purpose of this study was to examine which job resources are most valuable for research productivity, depending on varying teaching demands.

Design/methodology/approach

Data was collected from 324 management faculty at research, balanced and teaching (i.e. respectively low-, moderate- and high-teaching demands) public universities in the United States.

Findings

Results showed that no single job resource predicted research productivity across all three types of schools. At research schools (i.e. low-teaching demands), productivity was positively associated with job resources including summer compensation, level of protection for untenured faculty and number of research assistant hours, while negatively associated with travel funding. At balanced schools (i.e. moderate-teaching demands), research output was positively associated with time allocated to research, grant money, travel funding and conference attendance, while negatively associated with amount of consulting hours. At teaching schools (i.e. high-teaching demands), the only significant resource was time allocated to research.

Practical implications

This paper can help management faculty and business school leaders understand what resources are most appropriate given the teaching demands associated with the specific institution, and by further helping these institutions attract and retain the best possible faculty.

Originality/value

This study extends prior work on academic research performance by identifying resources that can help faculty publish given different levels of teaching demands. This is important as teaching demands tend to be relatively stable within an institution, while they can vary greatly across types of institutions.

Citation

Barney, C.E., Clark, B.B. and da Motta Veiga, S.P. (2022), "Research productivity of management faculty: job demands-resources approach", Career Development International, Vol. 27 No. 2, pp. 161-184. https://doi.org/10.1108/CDI-02-2021-0051