Stephen Procter

2.5k citations
61 papers · 1.6k · h-index 20

Impact in

Papers in

Stephen Procter

60 papers receiving 1.5k citations

Peers

Stephen Procter
Comparison fields: 5 of 107
  • Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management 791
  • Public Administration 251
  • Management Information Systems 245
  • Strategy and Management 368
  • Communication 95
Replace Michael I. Reed with:
Michael I. Reed United Kingdom
Bert Spector United States
Veronica Hope Hailey United Kingdom
Rosemary Stewart United Kingdom
Peter Berg United States
Philip Stiles United Kingdom
Ali Dastmalchian Canada
Larry Hubbell United States
Gloria Harrell‐Cook United States
Ian Palmer Australia
Stephen Procter relative to Michael I. Reed United Kingdom Michael I. Reed's profile →
Citations per field
00.5×3.4×
Michael I. Reed · 1×
Citations per year

Countries citing papers authored by Stephen Procter

Since Specialization
Citations

This map shows the geographic impact of Stephen Procter's research. It shows the number of citations coming from papers published by authors working in each country. You can also color the map by specialization and compare the number of citations received by Stephen Procter with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Stephen Procter more than expected).

Fields of papers citing papers by Stephen Procter

Since Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

This network shows the impact of papers produced by Stephen Procter. Nodes represent research fields, and links connect fields that are likely to share authors. Colored nodes show fields that tend to cite the papers produced by Stephen Procter. The network helps show where Stephen Procter may publish in the future.

Co-authors

The 25 scholars most cited alongside Stephen Procter, linked wherever they have co-authored with each other. Click a name or a connecting line to browse the papers they share.

Border = papers with Stephen Procter Line = papers co-authored together Stephen Procter links everyone, so they are left out of the graph.

All Works

20 of 20 papers shown

Showing the 20 most-cited of 61 papers — load more, or switch the sort, to bring in the rest.

#Work
1 2005241
2 2009168
3 2001126
4 2007102
5 199994
6 200087
7 199859
8 200754
9 200953
10 199448
11 200845
12 200042
13 200438
14 200838
15 201438
16 201936
17 200326
18 199725
19 199924
20 201823

About Stephen Procter

Stephen Procter is a scholar working on Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management, Public Administration, Management Information Systems, Sociology and Political Science and General Health Professions, having authored 61 papers that have together received 1.6k indexed citations. Recurring topics across this work include Management and Organizational Studies (13 papers), Labor Movements and Unions (9 papers), Accounting and Organizational Management (7 papers), Job Satisfaction and Organizational Behavior (7 papers), Public Policy and Administration Research (6 papers), Employment and Welfare Studies (6 papers), Organizational Downsizing and Restructuring (5 papers) and Human Resource and Talent Management (4 papers). The work is most often cited by research in Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management (791 citations), Public Administration (251 citations), Management Information Systems (245 citations), Strategy and Management (368 citations) and Communication (95 citations). Stephen Procter has collaborated with scholars based in United Kingdom, Australia and Chile. Frequent co-authors include Graeme Currie, Michael Rowlinson, Agnès Delahaye, Charles Booth, Peter Clark, Stephen Ackroyd, John Hassard, Frank Mueller, Geert Van Hootegem and Zoe Radnor. Their work appears in journals such as The International Journal of Human Resource Management, Personnel Review, Human Resource Management Journal, Journal of Organizational Change Management and Work Employment and Society.

Rankless uses publication and citation data sourced from OpenAlex, an open and comprehensive bibliographic database. While OpenAlex provides broad and valuable coverage of the global research landscape, it—like all bibliographic datasets—has inherent limitations. These include incomplete records, variations in author disambiguation, differences in journal indexing, and delays in data updates. As a result, some metrics and network relationships displayed in Rankless may not fully capture the entirety of a scholar's output or impact.

Explore authors with similar magnitude of impact