Hit papers significantly outperform the citation benchmark for their cohort. A paper qualifies
if it has ≥500 total citations, achieves ≥1.5× the top-1% citation threshold for papers in the
same subfield and year (this is the minimum needed to enter the top 1%, not the average
within it), or reaches the top citation threshold in at least one of its specific research
topics.
Strategic groups: Theory, research and taxonomy
1986548 citationsJohn McGee, Howard ThomasStrategic Management Journalprofile →
Peers — A (Enhanced Table)
Peers by citation overlap · career bar shows stage (early→late)
cites ·
hero ref
This map shows the geographic impact of John McGee'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 John McGee with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites John McGee more than expected).
This network shows the impact of papers produced by John McGee. 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 John McGee. The network helps show where John McGee may publish in the future.
Co-authorship network of co-authors of John McGee
This figure shows the co-authorship network connecting the top 25 collaborators of John McGee.
A scholar is included among the top collaborators of John McGee based on the total number of
citations received by their joint publications. Widths of edges
represent the number of papers authors have co-authored together.
Node borders
signify the number of papers an author published with John McGee. John McGee is excluded from
the visualization to improve readability, since they are connected to all nodes in the network.
Huang, Wei‐Jue, Jeffrey C. Hallo, William C. Norman, et al.. (2016). “To Plan or ot to Plan:” Serendipitous vs. Organized Travel. Scholarworks (University of Massachusetts Amherst).2 indexed citations
6.
McGee, John & Tanya Sammut‐Bonnici. (2015). Wiley encyclopedia of management, volume 12 : strategic management. John Wiley & Sons eBooks.5 indexed citations
7.
Pordes, R., D. Petravick, Bernd Krämer, et al.. (2008). The Open Science Grid status and architecture. Journal of Physics Conference Series. 119(5). 52028–52028.6 indexed citations
8.
Sammut‐Bonnici, Tanya, John McGee, & Robin Wensley. (2004). Complexity and complicity in mobile telecommunications : the effect of network externalities and isomorphic strategy. OAR@UM (University of Malta).1 indexed citations
9.
Austin, Claire C., B Bejcek, Marcie A. Glicksman, et al.. (2004). Data Standardization for Results Management -- Assay Guidance Manual.1 indexed citations
Thomas, Howard & John McGee. (1988). Technology and Strategic Management: A Research Review. Institutional Knowledge (InK) - Institutional Knowledge at Singapore Management University (Singapore Management University). 7.2 indexed citations
18.
Thomas, Howard & John McGee. (1986). Strategic Management Research: An European Perspective. Institutional Knowledge (InK) - Institutional Knowledge at Singapore Management University (Singapore Management University).17 indexed citations
19.
McGee, John & Howard Thomas. (1986). Strategic groups: Theory, research and taxonomy. Strategic Management Journal. 7(2). 141–160.548 indexed citations breakdown →
20.
McGee, John & Howard Thomas. (1984). Strategic groups : a useful linkage between industry structure and strategic management?. Illinois Digital Environment for Access to Learning and Scholarship (University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign).9 indexed citations
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.