Research agenda on turnaround strategies beyond systemic disruptions

Abstract

PurposeSince the Great Financial Crisis (GFC), the shocks are getting deeper and deeper on the economy, sectors and companies. In these years, turnaround strategies have evolved and contribute to improving the agility and audacity of managers. This article studies the change in the research agenda and in the academic discourse as systemic disruptions become widespread and provides evidence on collaboration networks and publication opportunities.Design/methodology/approachThis research uses a comparative bibliometric analysis to understand the changes in the academic debate as of 2008. The core collection of Web of Science (WoS) is used and 198 articles on turnaround strategies published in journals indexed in Journal Citation Reports® (JCR) – Social Sciences Citation Index (SSCI) in areas like business, management, economics and finance during 1965–2022.FindingsThis research reveals an important intertemporal evolution between periods, both in the collaborative networks of researchers and in the journals that dominate the impact discourse. In addition, it provides evidence of the change in academic discourse, through the evolution of the topics of interest after the GFC. The results suggest publication opportunities around gaps not yet closed by the academic literature.Practical implicationsThis article allows researchers to be guided in identifying gaps that have not yet been closed. In addition, this research has important managerial implications, since it guides and advises journal editors on new emerging issues.Originality/valueThis document offers a global vision on the subject of study and an understanding of the development of the discourse of the academy.

Research Agenda on Multiple-Criteria Decision-Making: New Academic Debates in Business and Management

“…Bibliometric studies have analyzed academic discourse in comparative terms for two periods [66]. Based on its relevance, the 2008 cutoff threshold has been used to analyze changes in trends in bibliometric terms [67][68][69].…”

Three Decades of Fuzzy AHP: A Bibliometric Analysis

“…The systemic change represented by the GFC acted as an accelerator in the interest of scholars in the fuzzy AHP area, and in the speed and transversality of the diffusion of the area over academics. In fact, the threshold set in 2008 has been used in multiple bibliometric articles (e.g., Bai et al [45] or Kocak et al [46]) to study the strong trend change experienced among scholars, being especially relevant in the fields of business and management [47].…”