Abstract:The paper considers individual academic productivity and the new managerialism in academic research as a set of social relations, common and opposite interests of a scholar and a university. The balance of interests is a necessary condition for regulating the contradictions among participants in public relations, including academic research. Reforming higher education results in new managerialism spreading wider and in scientific results paid attention to. The increasing accountability with a lack of mutual trust and information asymmetry creates the illusion of an imbalance of academic researchers’ interests in favor of management. The power potential of the new managerialism can become an instrument of both pressure and encouragement of individual academic productivity. As is shown in our review, this productivity, mainly published papers, is influenced by the principles of its assessment. The evolution of approaches to the academic results promotion provides a large variety of criteria for the selection of indicators to assess scientific activity. The game theory allows to reduce this variety to one common ground, where winning is considered to be the basis of relationships in academic research. As a result, there is a matrix model of four strategies – the extreme forms of scholar-and-management relationship manifestation within the system of academic research. Only one of these strategies means a balance of interests and long-term cooperation, the other three imply the contradiction of individual academic productivity vs the new managerialism and are short-term. The use of winning in a game as a basis and criterion of assessment for the individual academic productivity normalization contributes to opportunistic behavior neutralization. The author makes the conclusion that the type of strategy affects the combination of simple and qualitative indicators and professional expertise when assessing scientific results. It is reasonable to choose the indicators of assessment according to the most balanced strategy of regulating the contradictions among participants in academic research.

Are We Playing the Same Game?: Publishing Task Environments and Research Productivity Among Management Specialists

The importance of research teams with diverse backgrounds: Research collaboration in the Journal of Productivity Analysis

MEASURING RESEARCH PRODUCTIVITY OF MARKETING SCHOLARS AND MARKETING DEPARTMENTS

Looking at ourselves: Lessons about the operations management field learned from our top journals

Opening the Black Box: Task and Skill Mix and Productivity Dispersion

Publish, perish, or pursue? Early career academics’ perspectives on demands for research productivity in regional universities

Working Paper Series Enhancing Productivity : The Role of Management Practices

Comparing the Publication Process in Accounting, Economics, Finance, Management, Marketing, Psychology, and the Natural Sciences

Individual Academic Productivity vs New Managerialism in Academic Research

Explaining Sex Differences in Publication Productivity among Postsecondary Faculty

Are there gender differences among researchers from industrial/organizational psychology?

Enhancing Productivity: The Role of Management Practices

Power, Powerlessness, and Journal Ranking Lists: The Marginalization of Fields of Practice

The game of academic publishing: a review of gamified publication practices in the social sciences

Publishing Instincts: An Exploration-Exploitation Framework for Studying Academic Publishing Behavior and "Home Venues"

The Changing Landscape of Scholarly Publishing (in Finance) – An Author’s view

INFORMATION SCIENCE OBSERVED: NEW MEDIA AND PRODUCTIVITY IN A GROUP OF UK PRACTITIONERS

Is Our Organization Actually Measuring Productivity? How Contrasting Organizational and Individual Measures of Engineering Success is an Opportunity to Drive Engineering Transformation

The Role of Management Practices in Closing the Productivity Gap

An Empirical Investigation of the Relationship between Quality and Productivity

Reflecting on Motivations: How Reasons to Publish affect Research Behaviour in Astronomy