Systemic Practice and Action Research

18.3k citations
1.2k papers · · active since 2016

Impact in

Papers in

Systemic Practice and Action Research

1.1k papers receiving 15.7k citations

Peers

Systemic Practice and Action Research
Comparison fields: 5 of 193
  • Management Science and Operations Research 6.3k
  • Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management 2.7k
  • Management of Technology and Innovation 1.5k
  • Business and International Management 362
  • Strategy and Management 2.6k
Replace Revista Española de Investigaciones Sociológicas with:
Revista Española de Investigaciones Sociológicas Spain
International Journal of Social Research Methodology United Kingdom
International Journal of Managing Projects in Business Australia
Journal of Business Economics and Management Lithuania
Human Systems Management United States
Small Group Research United States
Simulation & Gaming United States
Advances in Developing Human Resources United States
Economic Research-Ekonomska Istraživanja China
foresight United States
Systemic Practice and Action Research relative to Revista Española de Investigaciones Sociológicas Spain Revista Española de Investigaciones Sociológicas's profile →
Citations per field
00.5×2×3×4×4.6×
Revista Española de Investigaciones Sociológicas · 1×
Citations per year

Countries where authors publish in Systemic Practice and Action Research

Since Specialization
Citations

This map shows the geographic impact of research published in Systemic Practice and Action 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 papers published in Systemic Practice and Action Research with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Systemic Practice and Action Research more than expected).

Fields of papers published in Systemic Practice and Action Research

Since Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

This network shows the impact of papers published in Systemic Practice and Action Research. Nodes represent research fields, and links connect fields that are likely to share authors. Colored nodes show fields that tend to cite the papers published in Systemic Practice and Action Research.

About Systemic Practice and Action Research

The 1.2k papers published in Systemic Practice and Action Research in the last decades have received a total of 18.3k indexed citations . Papers published in Systemic Practice and Action Research usually cover Management Science and Operations Research (584 papers), Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management (196 papers), Human Factors and Ergonomics (31 papers), Management of Technology and Innovation (79 papers) and Business and International Management (19 papers) specifically the topics of Complex Systems and Decision Making (544 papers), Information Systems Theories and Implementation (191 papers), Cognitive Science and Mapping (102 papers), Organizational Learning and Leadership (98 papers), Management and Organizational Studies (86 papers), Chaos, Complexity, and Education (78 papers), Innovation and Knowledge Management (72 papers) and Community Health and Development (56 papers). The most active scholars publishing in Systemic Practice and Action Research are John Easton Law, Gerald Midgley, Robert Louis Flood, Werner Ulrich, Edgar H. Schein, Peter B. Checkland, Sue Holwell, Norma R. A. Romm, John Mingers and Michael C. Jackson.

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 journals with similar magnitude of impact