Executive summary. The growing crisis of wellbeing in business schools is gaining attention among researchers concerned about the toll of the neoliberal institutional culture on scholars and scholarship, manifested by rising levels of anxiety, stress, and burnout. The article draws attention to how, particularly early-career academics’ (ECAs) wellbeing is compromised. Moving beyond critique, solutions are offered to promote a cultural transformation within business schools where Early Career Scholars are viewed not just as future academics chasing metrics, but as current contributors deserving of support and flourishing. Approaching the issue with 3 Rs: reasons, repercussions and remedies, the article is positioned within the emerging movement of ‘Positive Academia’, which seeks to reimagine academic life through values of care, collegiality, and collective transformation. We suggest that senior scholars can take positive steps in helping ECAs and lay the groundwork for a healthier academic culture, one that not only supports survival but fosters flourishing.

Key takeaways

• Performance-driven, managerialist systems in business schools are eroding collegiality, increasing pressure, and disproportionately harming early-career academics through stress, burnout, and precarious career conditions.
• Chronic pressure and lack of support not only damage wellbeing but also risk fostering disengagement and questionable research practices, undermining both scholarly integrity and institutional credibility.
• Business schools and senior academics must move beyond metric-focused models towards cultures of care, fairness, and inclusion, embedding wellbeing, mentorship, and ethical leadership to enable both academic flourishing and long-term institutional resilience.

---

In this article, we build on the calls to dismantle the harmful neoliberal culture embraced by many business schools (Fleming, 2021) and to promote a cultural transformation where Early-Career Scholars¹ are viewed not just as future academics chasing metrics, but as current contributors deserving of support and flourishing (Sathish and Harzing, 2025). Our work is positioned within the emerging movement of Positive Academia (Sathish and Harzing, 2025), which seeks to reimagine academic life through values of care, collegiality, and collective transformation.

There is a growing crisis of wellbeing in business schools, notably in neoliberal business schools, which are our focus here. Rising levels of anxiety, stress, and burnout are driven by excessive workload, competitive environments, and a lack of institutional support and understanding (Edwards et al., 2021). Unsurprisingly and sadly, academic wellbeing is gaining attention among researchers concerned about the toll of the neoliberal university culture on scholars and scholarship (Hurd and Singh, 2021).

In neoliberal business schools, which rely on performance metrics and strive on a ‘publish or perish’ culture (Fleming, 2021; Wilmott, 2011), senior colleagues often advise early-career academics to place boundaries around research time and avoid the perceived lesser valued non-research activities. They also urge them to carefully frame each research project to maximise outputs. But can early-career scholars realistically follow this advice today and into the future? Given the pressure they face to build their career, many suffer from high levels of work-related stress outcomes such as mental and physical health struggles, family breakdown and workplace bullying and harassment (Taberner, 2018; Hurd and Singh, 2021).

While acknowledging the wellbeing crisis affects students and staff alike (Volk, Billsberry and Ambrosini, 2025), we draw attention to how the managerialist culture embedded in many business schools creates an environment where early-career academics’ wellbeing is compromised. While the neoliberal, performance-metrics-driven culture affects all academics, our experience and that of others suggest that early-career academics face disproportionately high levels of stress and burnout, unsupportive academic cultures, and workplace stressors that significantly affect the wellbeing of early-career academics (Hollywood et al., 2020). Compared to their senior counterparts, early-career scholars often experience increased anxiety, depression, and emotional exhaustion, worsened by short-term contracts and unclear career paths (Cilli et al., 2023). For instance, they fear not passing probation (confirmation/tenure) and being out of a position within a few years because their publications are perceived as insufficient. They experience a poor work-life balance and suffer from unhappiness. Given many business schools’ commitment to the PRME and the UN SDGs, particularly those related to health and decent work, it is imperative that they care for their staff as workplaces that nurture not only excellence but also wellbeing and professional fulfilment. We approach the issues with 3 Rs: reasons, repercussions and remedies.

Reasons: From Collegiality to Control

The evolution of universities from being led by academics to being led by professional managers has been widely discussed (Billsberry et al., 2023). Many business schools have embraced a neoliberalist culture, enacted through managerialism. This has resulted in a major transformation of ethos (Fleming, 2021) over recent decades from essentially a collegial to a managerial one (McCarthy and Dragouni, 2021). Business schools’ conversion from ‘professional bureaucracies’ to ‘competitive bureaucracies’ has redefined these institutions’ purposes (Ghauri and Adler 2024). They transformed from loosely coupled systems based on academic values and preferences into “complete organisations” hierarchically organised, strategically managed, and with a unique identity communicated to external stakeholders. They signal one coherent and clearly bounded organisation (Sahlin and Eriksson-Zetterquist, 2016). This development had repercussions for the way business schools are governed (Jernberg, Jonson and Pallas, 2025).

The `new normal` in the aftermath of COVID-19 has shown emergent signs of new and different forms of collegiality finding expression in specific situations and locations and in new and innovative forms (Cloete et al., 2023). Acknowledging that collegiality is a multifaceted concept (Fleming and Harley, 2024), here we refer to it as the continued development of what constitutes good academic practice and how this practice should shape research, education and collaboration (Ahlbäck Öberg and Boberg, 2023; Cloete et al., 2023). Before the advent of managerialism, a ‘vertical’ approach to collegiality reflected decision-making within formal structures, with authority being held by academics, the modus operandi of universities, and core to their purpose (Ahlbäck Öberg and Boberg, 2023; Sahlin and Eriksson-Zetterquist, 2024). Managerialism has meant a shift away from this collegial model towards managerial hierarchies and performance metrics, supposedly aimed at increasing transparency (O’Neill, 2014). Professional ideology, based on shared values and beliefs, influences organisations as a form of ‘group idealism’, guiding what academics do (Stiles, 2011). However, academic ideology has been eroded by managerialism, leading to reduced participation in conversations about the meaningfulness of academic work, which is now a rarer occurrence under regimes of managerialist control (Alvesson and Spicer, 2012). The enduring managerialist approach borne of the neoliberalist agenda, which has been around for some thirty years, overlooks that many scholars consider themselves as professionals who value peer recognition and their belonging to a professional culture contributes to their social status and self-esteem (Hewitt, 2020). Managerialism has broken down our common values and collegiality, and is threatening our autonomy and freedom of speech (Fleming et al., 2022). It has permeated the core of our activities of generation and acquisition of knowledge, as well as its transmission. This has been compounded with some senior academics being instrumental, having a ‘mercenary mentality’ and playing the neoliberal ‘game’ to their benefit (Billsberry et al., 2023; Fleming and Harley, 2024). As such, the neoliberalist ‘game’ becomes normalised, and senior academics are encouraging early-career researchers to follow suit, should they want to strive (Tekeste, 2025).

Managerialism has produced unintended consequences. These include, first, reduced employee commitment, trust, creativity and collegiality, which may to some extent be attributed to the adherence to rules and guidelines, which is grounded in the idea of punishment, and which is antithetical to creativity and collegiality (Gabriel and Aguinis, 2022; McCann et al., 2020). Second, the systemic neoliberal pressures, such as performance metrics and competition, have also led, as we will see next, to some questionable research practices at times, as researchers feel these practices are necessary to survive (Brooker and Allum, 2024). Managerialism came to the fore with performance evaluation systems and the ‘Publish and Perish’ game. This, together with the lack of collegiality (which, when present, is a mechanism for a supportive, respectful, motivating and fulfilling environment), has led to burn-out for all, but in recent years it has become particularly concerning for early-career staff. This is damaging to their mental health and long-term career outcomes. This culture has led to stress, pressure, increased workload, widespread unhappiness and poor staff morale (Taberner, 2018).

In what follows, we explore the toll this cultural transformation takes on early-career scholars’ wellbeing and potentially, their integrity.

Repercussions: From Pressure to Peril

It has become more evident over the past few years that when combined, teaching demands, an unsupportive environment, lack of leadership empathy, research and external funding productivity measures, and lack of autonomy are leading to burnout (Steyn, 2025). Taken together, these issues are creating a ‘perfect storm’ for wellbeing concerns (Segarra, Villanueva and Martinez, 2023). This is compounded by the anxiety caused by the precariousness of the finances of the business school sector, coupled with increasing anxiety among academics around the purpose of the business schools and what they do.

Our experience working with early-career, bright, and keen scholars is that they feel tremendous career pressure. They are worried about research productivity and the looming uncertainty associated with not getting tenure/passing probation. This leads them to work excessively long hours, which have terrible consequences for their work-life balance, and at times, their mental and physical health. They are worried not only about their immediate career but also about their future. Many are still struggling to pay the debts that mounted from doing their PhD, they face the reality that business and management academic jobs are increasingly precarious and rare; and despite the rhetoric around transferable skills, transitioning to another sector is difficult. As a consequence, the angst related to them losing their job is tremendous. This is compounded by the fact, that despite apparent available support, such as mentoring or mental health support, they may not want to speak about their struggles, thinking that this would be seen as a sign of weakness and that they cannot cope with academic pressures. It can be especially so when they perceive their mentor strived under the neoliberal system, or they perceive the mentor may help them only to survive rather than thrive (Tekeste, 2025).

It is also documented that women, first-generation scholars, and underrepresented minorities are disproportionately represented among junior academics and face unique stressors that increase their risk of burnout. These groups often experience more financial strain, workplace mistreatment, and impostor syndrome, which harm wellbeing and career advancement (Muradoglu et al., 2022). Burnout among these populations threatens retention and diversity in academia, making it a vital equity issue. Much academic literature and commentaries in higher educational publications support our observations. Managerialist pressure has led to symptoms such as fatigue, insomnia, gastritis, and stress-related digestive issues. They also led to chronic stress, sleep deprivation, and emotional exhaustion (Segarra et al., 2023). They also found that the lack of collegiality stemming from the neoliberal culture left staff without much help in navigating the business school’s culture.

Ryan (2012) has described the emergence of ‘zombie academics’ as a metaphor for the living death experienced by those trapped in hyper-managerial university cultures. These academics continue to perform tasks (publishing, teaching, applying for grants) but often without autonomy, purpose, or genuine engagement. For early-career scholars, this zombification is not just symbolic; it reflects a survival strategy in a system that demands compliance over creativity, metrics over meaning. The pressure to perform, combined with a lack of support and collegiality, risks turning vibrant scholars into disengaged, exhausted academics, undermining both wellbeing and the integrity of academic life. It may arguably be even more so for early-academic women who often assume most of the ‘academic housework’ (Järvinen & Mik-Meyer, 2025). There is also the significant risk that business schools are going to become sterile environments where publications and grant achievements are heralded at the expense of anything else meaningful or with societal impact.

Another concerning aspect we are witnessing is the credibility crisis in academia resulting from this culture. The pressure to perform has led some to cut corners as a means of coping and succeeding in the neoliberal business schools. This can indirectly cause long-term career damage and related wellbeing issues. Lamenting this credibility crisis, scholars such as Aguinis et al. (2025) document evidence of this through paid authorships and paper mill submissions, as well as a rising number of submission retractions. These retractions originate from serious misconduct such as data fabrication, analysis falsification, duplicate publication, plagiarism, as well as questionable practices like selective reporting, HARKing, and opaque methods. The danger is that such practices become more widespread and normalised, blurring boundaries between best practice and ethical compromise. This managerialist culture, particularly its pressure on early-career scholars, creates conditions conducive to misconduct. But the stakes are high: if misconduct is uncovered (as retraction trends indicate is increasingly likely), their careers may suffer irreparable harm.

The erosion of wellbeing is not just a personal issue; it has systemic consequences. Chronic stress and fear-based cultures can distort academic judgment, leading to questionable research practices. A culture that prioritises care, support, and ethical leadership is not only more humane but also more likely to uphold the integrity of scholarship. The negative consequences of unchecked managerialist culture are clear, yet business schools are not powerless and their commitment to the PRME and UN SDGS calls for them to be proactive in fostering an ethical and healthier environment. Embracing the SDGs presents a critical opportunity for business schools to assume a leadership role in addressing the wellbeing societal imperative (Ambrosini, Jack and Thomas, 2023). By developing a comprehensive wellbeing-oriented culture, business schools can help develop a culture of flourishing for early-career scholars (Sathish and Harzing, 2025) and stop their wellbeing crisis (Volk, Billsberry and Ambrosini, 2025).

Remedies: From Pressure to Support

Business Schools

We have previously advocated that business school leaders must shift their mindset beyond the ‘perish and publish’ ethos and profit-driven goals. Accreditation bodies and business school deans need to work in tandem. They must recognise that value cannot solely be recognised via siloed metrics. Staff contribution, such as engagement and collegiality, must be recognised alongside their discipline-based publications or students’ evaluation scores. Management and staff coexist, and the business school can’t do one without the other. As Buller (2017) puts it, “you can’t teach students, conduct research, and perform service if you can’t pay the bills, and you can’t attract investment if you’re not viewed as intellectually distinctive.”

Business schools need to stop using rigid, punitive or reward-based models that may foster short-term compliance but harm wellbeing. These include financially rewarding publications perceived as top-tier in certain quality lists or in journals with a high impact factor, or removing funding or giving an increased teaching workload to those who published in perceived low-tier journals. Ghauri and Adler (2024) explain that credible performance evaluation systems that are perceived as fair, transparent and grounded in academic values are essential to further a sense of belonging. This matters for both high-quality research and teaching, but also critically for the staff’s wellbeing. Early-career academics are more likely to align with their business school’s values if they believe the evaluation systems in use are fair, rather than simply following rules out of fear.

Business schools should embrace a public good-oriented style of governance model. This includes developing clear, transparent and realistic workload expectations and performance demands. Workload models and rewards should be reviewed to promote a more supportive culture and include aspects such as collegiality and mentorship (admittedly, this may have the potential to be another performative and transactional activity…). Sathish and Harzing (2025) suggest that business schools should also embed wellbeing into performance reviews.

It also includes creating a governance model that empowers academics and promotes participation, all of which are important for wellbeing. Beyond these strictly task-related measures, business schools must offer meaningful support for stress and mental health, with easy access to health professionals and mental health awareness sessions. Moreover, business schools must integrate equality, equity, diversity and inclusion principles into their wellbeing strategies (Ambrosini et al., 2023). These issues are not a separate agenda, and addressing them will help create a safe working environment. Valuing diversity, fostering belonging, and reducing isolation would help.

Crucially, business schools must invest in the long-term development of their early-career academics and acknowledge the wellbeing crisis facing academia. Without such recognition, the matter can only get worse.

Senior Academics

Senior staff have a responsibility to act; they cannot allow the damaging culture to perpetuate even if they gained from it, and they certainly cannot expect the ‘system’ to transform itself passively. They are the ones who can afford or have the experience to speak out (Harley, 2019; Billsberry et al., 2023). As we and others have argued, they cannot remain complicit in this culture. Rather, they can contribute to transforming it by re-socialising junior academics to believe that being an academic is not a matter of total commitment to the system or a submissive attitude to the status quo. It is their duty to help stop perpetuating the system that continues to harm academics (Vu and Case, 2025).

They need to step up to their role as mentors and allow for the creation of ‘a safe space’ for dialogues with early-career staff. They need to foster collaboration and encourage dialogue without fear of judgment, retaliation or their ideas being appropriated. They also need to combat the often taken-for-granted idea that hyper-competition is positive. Finally, they must promote research integrity and set the example.

Positive Academia (2025), developed by Harzing and Sathish, provides a range of actionable recommendations on how academics can nurture a culture of psychological safety and celebrate purpose and impact beyond top-tier publications. These include developing mentoring programmes that focus on growth, not just performance, helping early-career academics to connect their work to personal value and addressing power dynamics. Hibbert (2025) also describes how reflexive leaders can build an environment where staff feel seen, heard and supported.

There is no doubt that early-career academics do bear some responsibilities in building a positive culture, for instance, by being collegial in their peer networks, supporting each other, speaking up in meetings, and celebrating each other’s achievements. Nevertheless, they should also challenge toxic behaviour and question unrealistic expectations. Early-career academics have to prioritise integrity, care and inclusion, and practice what Sathish and Harzing (2025) term subtle activism by engaging in small, everyday acts that challenge toxic norms without confrontation. However, it is incumbent on senior staff to cultivate a business school’s culture that fosters compassion, integrity, and that simply said, truly values people for their individuality. Academics are not numbers; not inputs into metrics, they are human beings.

Final Words

It is time we question what seems to be taken for granted. We need to move beyond critique and offer remedies. It means we need to reflect on the current status quo and envisage a future which embraces more humane and social values (Sathish and Harzing, 2025; Starkey and Tempest, 2025). This was our aim: to acknowledge the reasons behind the wellbeing crisis and understand its repercussions, so that we might prescribe alternative remedies.

In conclusion, research and experience demonstrate a significant wellbeing crisis amongst early-career business school academic staff, which is not simply a peripheral concern. A sense of belonging and recognition is a powerful buffer against burnout. Senior academics and business school leaders can play a pivotal role by acknowledging the diverse contributions of early-career scholars not just through metrics, but also through mentorship, inclusion in decision-making, and the valuing of their voices in shaping the academic community. If business schools are to remain credible institutions committed to the public good, they must reimagine success not as a race for outputs, but as a collective journey toward purpose, integrity, and human flourishing. This vision aligns with the principles of Positive Academia, which calls for a transformation of academic values and interactions: centring care, collegiality, and meaningful impact over competition and compliance. We must also move forward in collaboration, transcending the boundary between management and academia to develop different ways of thinking, working and doing that involve restoring trust and autonomy and that are based upon constant conversation. While the macro-level solutions are complex and multifaceted, and most likely context-specific, as individual scholars, we can take positive steps in helping early-career staff. We must lay the groundwork for a healthier academic culture, one that not only supports survival but fosters flourishing.

---

Footnotes

¹ Given our framing, to reflect the diversity of academic pathways and avoid privileging research at the expense of other activities, we deliberately use the term early-career scholars and not early-career researchers to denote individuals who are involved in teaching, research, service, external engagement and administration, and not just research.

---

References

Aguinis, H., Cope, A., Martin, U., and Yokoya, R. (2025). Transparency, reproducibility, and replicability in human resource management research. Personnel Review. forthcoming

Ahlbäck Öberg, S., and Boberg, J. (2023). The decollegialization of higher education institutions in Sweden. Nordic Journal of Studies in Educational Policy, 9(2) pp. 126-143.

Alvesson, M., and Spicer, A. (2012). A stupidity-based theory of organizations. Journal of Management Studies, 49(7) pp. 1194-1220

Ambrosini, V., Jack, G., and Thomas, L. (2023). How to develop a sustainable business school. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing.

Billsberry J., V. Ambrosini and L. Thomas (2023). Managerialist control in post-pandemic business schools: The tragedy of the new normal and a new hope, Academy of Management Learning & Education, 23(3) pp. 439-458.

Brooker, R., and Allum, N. (2024). Investigating the links between questionable research practices, scientific norms and organisational culture. Research Integrity and Peer Review, 9(1) pp. 12.

Buller, J. (2017) “Mercenary U”, in Academic Leader 33.11,2 Magna Publications https://www.academicbriefing.com/administration/mercenary-u/

Cloete, N., Cote, N., Crace, L., Delbridge, R., Denis, J.-L., Drori, G., Eriksson-Zetterquist, U., Gehman, J., Gerhardt, L.-M., Goldenstein, J., Harroche, A., Jandric, J., Kosmützky, A., Krücken, G., Lee, S., Lounsbury, M., Mizrahi-Shtelman, R., Musselin, C., Östh Gustafsson, H., and Walgenbach, P. (2023). “Outroduction”: A research agenda on collegiality in university settings. Research in the Sociology of Organizations, 87(1) pp. 181-211

Cilli, E., Ranieri, J., Guerra, F., and Di Giacomo, D. (2023). Early career researchers and mental health: Observational study of challenge and wellbeing. Health Science Reports, 6(11), e1649.

Edwards, M. S., Martin, A. J., and Ashkanasy, N. M. (2021). Mental health and psychological well-being among management students and educators. Journal of Management Education, 45(1) pp. 3–18

Fleming, P. (2021). Dark academia: How universities die. London: Pluto Press

Fleming, P., and Harley, B. (2024). Collegiality as control? How uncounted work gets done in the neoliberal business school. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 23(1) pp. 176-190.

Fleming, P., Olaison, L., Plotnikof, M., Pors, J. G., and Pullen, A. (2022). Crawling from the Wreckage. Ephemera: Theory & politics in organization, 22(3) pp. 1-20.

Gabriel, K. P., and Aguinis, H. 2022. How to prevent and combat employee burnout and create healthier workplaces during crises and beyond. Business Horizons, 65(1) pp. 183–192.

Ghauri, E., and Adler, R. (2024). Performance evaluation of academics: A social influence theory perspective. Accounting & Finance, 64(3), 2545-2575.

Harley, B. (2019). Confronting the crisis of confidence in management studies: Why senior scholars need to stop setting a bad example. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 18: 286–297 Harzing, A.W. & Sathish. C. Positive Academia https://positiveacademia.com

Hewitt, J. P. (2020). Chapter 22. The Social Construction of Self-Esteem. The Oxford handbook of positive psychology, p. 309-319. In Synder, C.R, Lopez, S.J., Edwards, L. & Marques, S.C. (eds). 3rd edition, Oxford University Press.

Hibbert, P. (2025). Formative, not extractive: How critically reflexive research makes a difference. Management Learning, 56(1) pp. 107-114.

Hollywood, A., McCarthy, D., Spencely, C., and Winstone, N. (2020). ‘Overwhelmed at first’: the experience of career development in early career academics. Journal of Further and Higher Education, 44(7) pp. 998-1012.

Hurd, F., and Singh, S. (2021). ‘Something has to change’: A collaborative journey towards academic well-being through critical reflexive practice. Management Learning, 52(3) pp. 347-363.

Järvinen, M., and Mik-Meyer, N. (2025). Giving and receiving: Gendered service work in academia. Current Sociology, 73(3) pp. 302-320.

Jernberg, S. Jonson, M. and Pallas, J. (2025) The diminishing spaces for collegial work, Scandinavian Journal of Management, 41(1), 101386.

McCarthy, D., and Dragouni, M. (2021). Managerialism in UK business schools: Capturing the interactions between academic job characteristics, behaviour and the metrics culture. Studies in Higher Education, 46(11) pp. 2338–2354

McCann, L., Granter, E., Hyde, P., and Aroles, J. 2020. “Upon the gears and upon the wheels” terror convergence and total administration in the neoliberal university. Management Learning, 51: 431–451.

Muradoglu, M., Horne, Z., Hammond, M. D., Leslie, S. J., and Cimpian, A. (2022). Women—particularly underrepresented minority women—and early-career academics feel like impostors in fields that value brilliance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 114(5) pp. 1086.

O’Neill, M. (2014) The Slow University: Work, Time and Well-Being. Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 15(3) Art. 14, September 2014. http://www.qualitative-research.net/

Ryan, S. (2012). Academic zombies: A failure of resistance or a means of survival? Australian Universities’ Review, The, 54(2) pp. 3-11.

Sahlin, K., and Eriksson-Zetterquist, U. (2016). Collegiality in modern universities–the composition of governance ideals and practices. Nordic Journal of Studies in Educational Policy, 2-3 pp. 33640.

Segarra, P., Villanueva, C. E., and Martinez, L. (2023). Faculty’s subjective well-being: Insights from a Mexican business school. Qualitative Research in Organizations and Management: An International Journal, 18(1) pp. 46-66.

Sathish, C., and Harzing, A. W. (2025). Let’s form a positive academia collective transformation: Re-imagining our academic values and interactions. Management Learning, 13505076251351089.

Starkey, K., and Tempest, S. (2025). The Business School and the End of History: Reimagining Management Education. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 24(1) pp. 111-125

Steyn, R. (2025). Stress and Burnout amongst Business School Staff. International Journal of Educational Studies, 8(2) pp. 100-119.

Stiles, D. R. (2011). Disorganization, disidentification and ideological fragmentation: Verbal and pictorial evidence from a British business school. Culture and Organization, 17(1) pp. 5-30

Taberner, A. M (2018). The marketisation of the English higher education sector and its impact on academic staff and the nature of their work. International Journal of Organizational Analysis, 26(1) pp. 129-152.

Tekeste, M. (2025). Under pressure: Becoming the good enough academic. Organization, 13505084251383285.

Thomas, L., and Ambrosini, V. (2021). The future role of the business school: A value cocreation perspective. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 20(2) pp. 249-269.

Volk, S., J. Billsberry, and Ambrosini, V. (2025). Rise and shine: A circadian perspective on learning and wellbeing in management education. Academy of Management Learning & Education

Vu, M. C., and Case, P. (2025). Overcoming Contemporary Academic Attachments: Developing Even-Mindedness in Neoliberal Cultures of Excellence. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 24(2) pp. 244-264.

Willmott, H. (2011). Journal list fetishism and the perversion of scholarship: reactivity and the ABS list. Organization, 18(4) pp. 429-442