Publication records of accounting and finance faculty promoted to professor: Evidence from the UK

Abstract

This study investigates publication profiles of 137 accounting and finance faculty promoted to professor at UK universities during 1992–2007. On average, nine papers in established academic journals, with 5 at the highest 3*/4* quality levels in a portfolio of 20 outputs are required for promotion. Based on various theoretical perspectives, multivariate models of key performance benchmarks (quality and quantity measures) are constructed and have good explanatory power (R2 ≥ 0.7). Publication requirements seem to have increased over time, argued to be mainly attributable to government-initiated Research Assessment Exercises. For internal promotions, there is some evidence of higher hurdles but no evidence that quality requirements differ based on gender; sub-discipline; research intensity of institution peer group; or government-initiated research ranking of unit. Similarly, the quality benchmark is not reduced for those having an increased recent publication history, a high number of non-ABS outputs or sole-authored papers. Comparison with the US suggests underlying geographically-based paradigm differences. UK promotion benchmarks are argued to have evolved through a dynamic and complex interaction between university managers, the government and the accounting and finance academic community.