Grounded in sociological agency theory, the authors study the role of the faculty research incentive system in the academic research conducted at business schools and business school health. The authors surveyed 234 marketing professors and completed 22 interviews with 14 (associate) deans and 8 external institution stakeholders. They find that research quantity contributes to the research health of the school, but not to other aspects of business school health. r-quality of research (i.e., rigor) contributes more strongly to the research health of the school than research quantity. q-quality (i.e., practical importance) of research does not contribute to the research health of the school but contributes positively to teaching health and several other dimensions of business school health. Faculty research incentives are misaligned: (1) when monitoring research faculty, the number of publications receives too much weight, while creativity, literacy, relevance, and awards receive too little weight; and (2) faculty feel that they are insufficiently compensated for their research, while (associate) deans feel they are compensated too much for their research. These incentive misalignments are largest in schools that perform the worst on research (r- and q-) quality. The authors explore how business schools and faculty can remedy these misalignments.

基于社会学代理理论，作者研究了教师激励机制在商学院和商学院健康方面进行的学术研究中的作用。作者对234位营销教授进行了调查，并完成了对14位（副）院长和8位外部机构利益相关者的22次访谈。他们发现研究数量有助于学校的研究健康，但对商学院健康的其他方面没有贡献。[R的研究-质量（即，严谨性）更强烈地促进了学校科研相比数量的研究健康。q高质量的研究（即，具有实践重要性）不会对学校的研究健康有所帮助，但会对教学健康和商学院健康的其他几个方面产生积极的影响。教职员工的研究动机是不统一的：（1）在监视研究人员时，出版物的数量过重，而创造力，素养，相关性和奖项的重视过少；（2）教职员工认为他们的研究报酬不足，而（副）院长认为他们的研究报酬过高。在研究质量（r-和q-）最差的学校中，这些激励失调最大。作者探讨了商学院和教职员工如何纠正这些错位。