عنوان مقاله [English]
Background and Objectives: Subject analysis of the Management Research published in Knowledge and Information Science journals to identify their degree of compliance with management issues and challenges, as well as identifying the research gaps in this area.
Methodology: This study is an applied research that was conducted using a mixed method, approach applying content analysis techniques. The research population consisted of two groups: 1. Papers with the subject of management published in the scientific journals in the field of KIS (8 journals). The data collection tool used for this group was a check list; 2. Experts and professionals of KIS with management experience and expertise (7 people) who participated in the survey through a written interview.
Findings: The findings showed that only a small part of the scientific papers (17%) had addressed the management field and its related issues. Among the reviewed journals, most of the papers in this field had been published in two journals of Academic Librarianship and Information Research and Studies in Library and Information Science (24.5% and 22.5% of the total papers, respectively). The most repeated topics were Knowledge Management, and the Quality of Services. The discrepancy observed in the subjects addressed in the research in the field of management, the results of which have been published as research articles in scientific journals, and the tendency of these articles to the subject of knowledge management and its related sub-topics seems to be rooted in several issues: The first issue relates to the qualitative shortcomings of research in this field. Most research is done either in the form of theses and dissertations by graduate students, or as part of the requirements of some courses such as Planning in Libraries and Information Centers in the Ph.D. program, and Organizational Knowledge Management in the Master's program. The second issue is the shortcomings of research and writing about Management. Research itself and, in the broader context, writing in the field of Management in Information Science is not only qualitatively but also quantitatively deficient in quantitative terms. The third issue is rooted in the difficulties of research in the field of management. Of the challenge sources are the courses that deal with management of libraries and information centers in different levels of education from undergraduate to doctoral; courses such as: Library and Information Centers Management, Organizational Knowledge Management, Management Information Systems and Planning in Libraries and Information Centers. Regarding the KIS Curriculum, the proportion of courses relevant to Knowledge Management is greater than other courses. This can be an important reason for boosting of the research in this field. From another point, however, the limited period of time allocated to post-graduate studies (normally 2 to 4 years) provides students with just the opportunity to familiarize themselves with managerial issues superficially, let alone the have the chance to grasp profound proficiency in theoretical and practical aspects of management, whether generally or specially in different levels of management. The fourth problem stems out from the continuous adherence of new findings to the wealth of knowledge available in this area, especially that which can be marked as managerial fads. Unfortunately, not only in this field, but also in many other areas, a large amount of research appears to have been undertaken due to following the momentary management modes as well as adherence to systems, models and styles that are almost entirely tailored to the needs and requirements of other countries. In experts' views, the most important issues in this area are: Inadequate skills, ill-managerial knowledge and expertise due to problems such as the paucity of employment of knowledgeable managers, unfamiliarity of managers with modern management in theory and practice, neglecting management as an important specialization and the need for considering knowledge, expertise and personal capability of applicants for management jobs; organizational problems such as problems and deficiencies that exist in the organization chart against the demands of clients for their diverse desired services; decision-making issues in institutions that usually are rooted in deficiencies such as lack of stable and sustainable management and lack of strategic view towards the challenges of technology development in these centers. In experts’ views, other challenge areas are: the issue of libraries' competition with other organizations, centralization and decentralization in library management, manpower management and interaction with library staff, service quality management approaches, creativity enhancement strategies, and, staff and teamwork. Review of numerous articles and comparison of their contents with research priorities as pointed out by experts indicates that, apart from the quality of services which is the most frequent subject discussed in most of the reviewed journals, there’s almost no agreement among the trio aspects, i.e., these articles, the important research topics suggested by management experts, and, issues set forth by experts in science and information science.
Discussion: The priorities of research in the field of management in experts’ views are related to issues such as specialization in management theories, management techniques, planning for the development of services, and managers' attitudes towards management challenges; however, there is little consistency between these topics and the duplicate topics of papers in this area. It seems that the most important reasons for this come from the qualitative and quantitative shortcomings of research and writing, the complications of research in this field, and following management fads.