The New Industrial Engineering: Information Technology and Business Process Redesign
- Journal
- DSpace@MIT (Massachusetts Institute of Technology)
In The Last Decade
doi.org/w81300708 →Countries where authors are citing The New Industrial Engineering: Information Technology and Business Process Redesign
This map shows the geographic impact of The New Industrial Engineering: Information Technology and Business Process Redesign. 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 The New Industrial Engineering: Information Technology and Business Process Redesign with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites The New Industrial Engineering: Information Technology and Business Process Redesign more than expected).
Fields of papers citing The New Industrial Engineering: Information Technology and Business Process Redesign
This network shows the impact of The New Industrial Engineering: Information Technology and Business Process Redesign. Nodes represent research fields, and links connect fields that are likely to share authors. Colored nodes show fields that tend to cite the The New Industrial Engineering: Information Technology and Business Process Redesign.
About The New Industrial Engineering: Information Technology and Business Process Redesign
This paper, published in 2011, received 750 indexed citations . Written by Thomas H. Davenport and James E. Short. It is primarily cited by scholars working on Management Information Systems (482 citations), Strategy and Management (189 citations) and Information Systems (121 citations). Published in DSpace@MIT (Massachusetts Institute of Technology).
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.
This paper is also available at doi.org/w81300708.