2004 AIB Member Survey - Full Results
Conference Section
Page 1 - Q1) Attendance History
Question: Which of the past conferences had you attended?
|
Yes |
No |
| Count |
% |
Count |
% |
| Attended Stockholm (2004) |
433 |
42.3% |
591 |
57.5% |
| Attended Monterrey (2003) |
261 |
25.5% |
763 |
74.5% |
| Attended San Juan (2002) |
214 |
20.9% |
810 |
79.1% |
| Attended Sydney (2001) |
146 |
14.3% |
878 |
85.7% |
| Attended Phoenix (2000) |
260 |
25.4% |
764 |
74.6% |
Cross-tabulation of Stockholm and Monterrey Meetings with Quebec City intentions:
|
|
Will Attend Quebec |
| Yes |
No |
Don't Know |
| Attended Stocholm |
Yes |
59.4% |
13.6% |
27.0% |
| No |
30.5% |
33.3% |
36.2% |
|
|
Will Attend Quebec |
| Yes |
No |
Don't Know |
| Attended Monterrey |
Yes |
69.7% |
9.6% |
20.7% |
| No |
33.4% |
30.6% |
36.3% |
Those who said "will not attend" are equally split among three main reasons:
- Do not like the timing: either summer is bad, teaching, or too close to AoM or other conferences.
- Those who have other obligations (administrative, personal, etc.)
- No funding available.
Those who said "do not know" said so because:
- Primarily depends on whether they can get a paper ready and whether it gets accepted.
- Do not know their schedule yet.
Page 1 - Q3) Conference Timing
Question: Please rate your preference for the following dates for future conferences (post 2006):
Options: Late June, July, September, October, November
Scale: 7-point Likert Scale (1-Low Preference, 7-High Preference)
| Date |
1-Low (%) |
2 (%) |
3 (%) |
4 (%) |
5 (%) |
6 (%) |
7-High (%) |
Mean |
| Late June |
25.8% |
4.8% |
2.3% |
12.1% |
8.7% |
19.7% |
26.6% |
4.38 |
| July |
22.0% |
7.3% |
2.6% |
10.3% |
8.8% |
19.8% |
29.3% |
4.53 |
| September |
38.0% |
8.2% |
5.7% |
15.5% |
7.5% |
14.0% |
11.0% |
3.33 |
| October |
39.1% |
11.3% |
4.5% |
14.2% |
7.3% |
12.1% |
11.5% |
3.21 |
| November |
39.2% |
10.0% |
3.3% |
15.5% |
7.2% |
11.2% |
13.5% |
3.29 |
Averages for Date Preferences
| Date |
N |
Mean |
Std. Deviation |
| Late June |
895 |
4.38 |
2.380 |
| July |
924 |
4.53 |
2.352 |
| September |
890 |
3.33 |
2.232 |
| October |
882 |
3.21 |
2.235 |
| November |
901 |
3.29 |
2.282 |
Other Date Preferences
|
Frequency |
| December |
16 |
| January |
25 |
| February |
9 |
| March |
9 |
| April |
9 |
| May |
40 |
| Early June |
13 |
| August |
30 |
Date Preferences Among Members NOT Attending Quebec
| Date |
1-Low (%) |
2 (%) |
3 (%) |
4 (%) |
5 (%) |
6 (%) |
7-High (%) |
| Late June |
27.9% |
4.2% |
2.3% |
13.5% |
7.9% |
20.5% |
23.7% |
| July |
27.9% |
7.0% |
3.3% |
11.2% |
8.8% |
20.9% |
20.9% |
| September |
36.9% |
8.4% |
2.8% |
19.6% |
5.1% |
16.8% |
10.3% |
| October |
40.9% |
10.6% |
2.9% |
16.8% |
7.2% |
13.5% |
8.2% |
| November |
37.9%% |
7.8% |
1.8% |
20.1% |
8.2% |
12.3% |
11.9% |
Result: Mean preference for Late June and July are significantly higher than September, October, and November. The differences within the two groups are not statistically significant. Further analysis of respondents who indicated that they will not be attending the Quebec conference yielded similar results.
Page 1 - Q4) Future Site Locations
Question: Please rate your preference for the following dates for future site locations:
Options: North American (NA) Hub City, NA Resort Town, Europe, Asia, Latin America, Africa
Scale: 7-point Likert Scale (1-Low Preference, 7-High Preference)
| Location |
1-Low (%) |
2 (%) |
3 (%) |
4 (%) |
5 (%) |
6 (%) |
7-High (%) |
Total |
| NA Hub City |
15.2% |
6.3% |
3.8% |
17.8 |
12.4% |
21.3% |
23.3% |
4.63 |
| NA Resort |
17.5% |
8.5% |
5.3% |
18.0% |
13.1% |
19.7% |
18.0% |
4.32 |
| Europe |
4.2% |
2.2% |
3.1% |
10.6% |
14.8% |
26.7% |
38.4% |
5.63 |
| Asia |
12.5% |
6.4% |
5.1% |
12.4% |
13.3% |
22.1% |
28.2% |
4.86 |
| Latin America |
15.7% |
9.6% |
5.7% |
12.8% |
13.3% |
19.0% |
23.8% |
4.51 |
| Africa |
32.5% |
12.1% |
3.3 |
6.4 |
14.4% |
10.1% |
13.3% |
3.43 |
Averages for Location Preferences
|
N |
Mean |
Std. Deviation |
| NA Hub |
894 |
4.63 |
2.083 |
| NA Resort |
873 |
4.32 |
2.100 |
| Europe |
926 |
5.63 |
1.583 |
| Asia |
902 |
4.86 |
2.060 |
| Latin America |
889 |
4.51 |
2.155 |
| Africa |
870 |
3.43 |
2.208 |
Result: Mean preference for Europe is significantly higher than for all other locations. Mean preference for Africa is significantly lower than for all other locations. Mean preference for Asia is significantly higher than for NA Resort and Latin America. All other differences are non-significant.
Page 1 - Q5) Frontiers Conference Preference
Question: Please rate your preference for AIB to continue organizing the AIB/JIBS Frontiers Conference.
Scale: 7-point Likert Scale (1-Low Preference, 7-High Preference)
|
1-Low (%) |
2 (%) |
3 (%) |
4 (%) |
5 (%) |
6 (%) |
7-High (%) |
Total Count |
| Frontiers Rating |
12.2% |
3.2% |
3.3% |
41.1% |
8.5% |
16.8% |
14.9% |
970 |
JIBS Section
Page 2 - Q1) Journal of International Business Studies
Question: How frequently do you consult the print and online (JIBS.net) versions of JIBS?
|
Daily |
Two/Three Times a Week |
Weekly |
Monthly |
When a new issue is Published |
Less Frequently |
Not at all |
| JIBS Print |
.5% |
3.6% |
10.2% |
22.0% |
48.0% |
10.5% |
5.2% |
| JIBS Online |
.4% |
4.2% |
8.0% |
22.0% |
11.3% |
29.1% |
25.0% |
Page 2 - Q3) JIBS Content Rating
Question: Would you rate the content of JIBS on average as:
Answers: Superior quality research (A rank journal), High quality research (A- rank journal), Moderate quality (B+/B rank), Poor quality (C+ or lower), No opinion
JIBS Content Rating
| Grade |
Count |
% |
| A |
274 |
28.6% |
| A- |
505 |
52.8% |
| B+/B |
148 |
15.5% |
| C+ or Lower |
9 |
.9% |
| No Opinion |
21 |
2.2% |
| Total |
957 |
100% |
Page 2 - Q5) JIBS Peer Review Process
Question: How would you rate the JIBS peer review process?
Answers: Superior quality research (A rank journal), High quality research (A- rank journal), Moderate quality (B+/B rank), Poor quality (C+ or lower), No opinion
JIBS Peer Review Process Rating
| Grade |
Count |
% |
| Excellent |
88 |
11.0% |
| Good- |
233 |
29.1% |
| Average |
108 |
13.5% |
| Poor |
80 |
10% |
| No Opinion |
292 |
36.5% |
| Total |
801 |
100% |
Page 2 - Q6) JIBS Overall Experience
Question: Overall, how would you rate your experience with JIBS in the last 2 years?
Answers: Excellent, Good, Average, Poor, No Opinion
JIBS Overall Experience
| Grade |
Count |
% |
| Excellent |
117 |
13.3% |
| Good |
378 |
42.9% |
| Average |
156 |
17.7% |
| Poor |
61 |
6.9% |
| No Opinion |
170 |
19.3% |
| Total |
882 |
100% |
Submitted to JIBS in last two years * JIBS Peer Review Rating Cross-tabulation
|
JIBS Peer Review Rating |
Totals |
| Excellent |
Good |
Average |
Poor |
No Opinion |
| Submitted to JIBS in last two years |
No |
Count |
77 |
192 |
85 |
52 |
292 |
698 |
| % |
11.0% |
27.5% |
12.2% |
7.4% |
41.8% |
100.0% |
| Yes |
Count |
11 |
41 |
23 |
28 |
0 |
103 |
| % |
10.7% |
39.8% |
22.3% |
27.2% |
0% |
100.0% |
| Totals |
Count |
88 |
233 |
108 |
80 |
292 |
801 |
| % |
11.0% |
29.1% |
13.5% |
10.0% |
36.5% |
100.0% |
Page 3 - Q1) Website Visits
Question: How often do you visit the AIB Website?
Answers: Once a day, Once a week, Once a nonth, Less than Once a month, Never
AIB Website Visit Frequency
|
Count |
% |
| Once a day |
12 |
1.2% |
| Once a week |
99 |
10.2% |
| Once a month |
296 |
30.6% |
| Less than once a month |
482 |
49.9% |
| Never |
77 |
8.0% |
| Total |
966 |
100% |
Page 3 - Q2) Level of Interest
Question: Which of the following statements accurately reflects your level of interest in the AIB-L (AIB's Listserv)?
Answers: Read each message with interest, Glance at each message - read only those of interest, Glance at each message - but find nothing of interest, Not aware that AIB has a listserv
Level of Interest in AIB-L
|
Count |
% |
| Read each message with interest |
85 |
9.0% |
| Glance at each message, read only those of interest |
560 |
59.3% |
| Glance at each message, but find nothing of interest |
72 |
7.6% |
| Not aware that AIB has a listserv |
228 |
24.1% |
| Total |
945 |
100% |
Page 3 - Q3) Level of Interest
Question: Which of the following statements accurately reflects your level of interest in the AIB Newsletter?
Answers: Read each message with interest, Glance at each message - read only those of interest, Glance at each message - but find nothing of interest, Not aware that AIB has a newsletter
Level of Interest in AIB Newsletter
|
Count |
% |
| Read each message with interest |
64 |
6.7% |
| Glance at each message, read only those of interest |
601 |
62.9% |
| Glance at each message, but find nothing of interest |
129 |
13.5% |
| Not aware that AIB has a newsletter |
161 |
16.9% |
| Total |
955 |
100% |
Page 3 - Q4) Level of Interest
Question: Which of the following statements accurately reflects your level of interest in the AIB Insights?
Answers: Read each message with interest, Glance at each message - read only those of interest, Glance at each message - but find nothing of interest, Not aware that of AIB Insights
Level of Interest in AIB Insights
|
Count |
% |
| Read each message with interest |
83 |
8.7% |
| Glance at each message, read only those of interest |
724 |
75.8% |
| Glance at each message, but find nothing of interest |
98 |
10.3% |
| Not aware of AIB Insights |
50 |
5.2% |
| Total |
955 |
100% |
Page 3 - Q5) Preferred Format
Question: Please indicate your preferred format for receiving AIB Newsletter and AIB Insights
Answers: Both Online only, Newsletter Online/Insights Hard copy, Newsletter Hard copy/Insights Online, Both as Hard Copy, No opinion
Preferred Format
|
Count |
% |
| Both Online only |
431 |
45% |
| Newsletter Online/Insights Hard copy |
73 |
7.6%% |
| Newsletter Hard copy/Insights Online |
60 |
6.3% |
| Both as Hard Copy |
299 |
31.2% |
| No opinion |
95 |
9.9% |
| Total |
958 |
100% |
|
