PurposeAlthough many in academe have speculated about the effects of pressure to publish on the management discipline – often referred to as “publish or perish” – prevailing knowledge has been based on anecdotal rather than empirical evidence. The aim of the present paper is to shed light on the perceptions of management faculty regarding the pressure to publish imperative.Design/methodology/approachThe authors surveyed faculty in 104 management departments of AACSB accredited, research‐oriented US business schools to explore the prevalence, sources, and effects of pressure to publish.FindingsResults indicate that pressure to publish affects both tenured and tenure‐track management faculty, although the latter, as a group, feel significantly more pressure than those who are tenured. The primary source of this pressure is faculty themselves who are motivated by the prospects of enhancing their professional reputation, leaving a permanent mark on their profession, and increasing their salary and job mobility. The effects of pressure to publish include heightened stress levels; the marginalization of teaching; and research that may lack relevance, creativity, and innovation.Research limitations/implicationsThe sample was intentionally restricted to faculty from management departments affiliated with research‐oriented US business schools and does not include faculty from departments that are less research‐oriented and, therefore, would be expected to put less pressure on their faculty to publish.Practical implicationsAlthough the effects of pressure to publish are not necessarily always negative, the paper offers some fundamental suggestions to management (and other) faculty who wish to mitigate the deleterious effects of pressure to publish.Originality/valueAlthough the findings may not be surprising to more seasoned faculty, to the authors' knowledge this is the first time they have been documented in the published literature. As such, they advance discussions of “publish or perish” beyond mere conjecture and “shared myths” allowing management faculty to more rationally debate its consequences and their implications for academic life.

This research-based essay presents survey results-collected from faculty in 104 PhDgranting management departments of AACSB-accredited business schools in the United States-regarding 11 different types of questionable research conduct, including data fabrication, data falsification, plagiarism, inappropriately accepting or assigning authorship credit, and publishing the same data or results in two or more publications. Findings suggest that instances of research misconduct covering a broad array of behaviors are not unknown to survey respondents.

There are few more familiar aphorisms in the academic community than “publish or perish.” Venerated by many and dreaded by more, this phenomenon is the subject of the authors’ essay. Here they consider the publish or perish principle that has come to characterize life at many business schools. They explain when and why it began and suggest reasons for its persistence. This exercise elicits questions that appear as relatively neglected but are integral to our profession, namely, the effect of publish or perish on the creativity, intellectual lives, morale, and psychological and emotional states of faculty.