Publication activity
Articles grouped by publication year
Hover over a year or focus the chart and use arrow keys to inspect values.
2026 is year to date. 0 undated publications excluded.
Research across participating journals · All insights follow your collection filters.
Publication activity alongside incoming citations.
Articles grouped by publication year
Hover over a year or focus the chart and use arrow keys to inspect values.
2026 is year to date. 0 undated publications excluded.
OpenAlex · year of the citing work
Hover over a year or focus the chart and use arrow keys to inspect values.
2017–2026 annual-history window. 2026 is year to date. Unknown years have gaps.
Leading affiliations and themes in this collection.
Full distributions & methodology ↓Independent sources. Clear time scales.
Crossref and OpenAlex · separate totals for the same publication cohorts
Hover over a year or focus the chart and use arrow keys to inspect values.
Latest lifetime totals, grouped by the cited article’s year. These are not citations received in that year.
OpenAlex · incoming citation links grouped by citing-work year
Hover over a year or focus the chart and use arrow keys to inspect values.
2017–2026 annual-history window. 2026 is year to date. Unknown years have gaps.
Select journals to compare the same collection filters. Source totals stay separate. These measures describe research activity, not journal quality.
Articles by publication year
Latest lifetime totals · grouped by publication year
Latest lifetime totals · grouped by publication year
By year of the citing work · 2017–2026
2026 is year to date. Crossref and OpenAlex lifetime charts share a citation scale. Unknown observations appear as gaps; known zero stays zero. Annual receipts use available OpenAlex histories and may not sum to lifetime totals. 0 undated publications excluded from publication-year charts.
Crossref citation coverage: 3 / 3 publications (100.0%). Latest observation: 21 Oct 2026, 07:22 UTC. Means and percentages use records with known counts.
DOI-matched OpenAlex observations for the same selected publications. These counts are separate from Crossref and are never added together.
Observation range: 22 Oct 2026 01:42 UTC — 23 Oct 2026 07:25 UTC. Missing matches are not zero citations. Previous observations may remain if a refresh fails or a DOI no longer matches.
OpenAlex affiliations and primary-topic classification. Each publication counts once per institution or country; multi-affiliated publications appear in multiple groups, so percentages can sum above 100%. Countries describe author affiliations, not nationality. Topics use one primary topic per publication.
3 / 3 with data · 0 missing or unmatched. Percentages use all 3 selected publications.
3 / 3 with data · 0 missing or unmatched. Percentages use all 3 selected publications.
3 / 3 with data · 0 missing or unmatched. Percentages use all 3 selected publications.
Citations are the latest recorded totals for articles published in each year, not citations received during that year. Crossref and OpenAlex remain separate and share the same citation scale. 2026 is incomplete; newer articles have had less time to receive citations.
0 undated publications excluded. Unknown citation counts are shown as —, never as zero. Partial coverage can understate totals; expand each table for known / total records.
| Publication year | Journal / scope | Publications | Publications | Crossref known | OpenAlex known |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2018 | All selected publications | 1 | 1 | 1/1 | 1/1 |
| 2019 | All selected publications | 2 | 2 | 2/2 | 2/2 |
| Publication year | Journal / scope | Crossref citations | Publications | Crossref known | OpenAlex known |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2018 | All selected publications | 7 | 1 | 1/1 | 1/1 |
| 2019 | All selected publications | 4 | 2 | 2/2 | 2/2 |
| Publication year | Journal / scope | OpenAlex citations | Publications | Crossref known | OpenAlex known |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2018 | All selected publications | 8 | 1 | 1/1 | 1/1 |
| 2019 | All selected publications | 9 | 2 | 2/2 | 2/2 |
Incoming citations to the selected publications, grouped by the year of the citing work. This is separate from lifetime citation totals grouped by the cited article’s publication year.
The publication filters above define which articles receive the citations. The citation-year range below only controls this chart and the incoming-citation comparison. Removing publication-year filters includes older articles’ incoming citations too.
Annual history available for 3 / 3 selected publications. Supported display window: 2017–2026; 2026 is incomplete. Within a successfully fetched ten-year window, omitted years mean zero. Missing histories and years beyond a saved observation’s window remain unknown (—); partial coverage can understate totals.
Annual-history observations (UTC): 2026-10-22T01:42:00.714917+00:00 — 2026-10-23T07:25:40.319487+00:00. Older observations may be retained after failed or incomplete refreshes.
| Citation year | Journal / scope | OpenAlex · Citations received by year | Publications | Annual history known |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2017 | All selected publications | 0 | 3 | 3/3 |
| 2018 | All selected publications | 0 | 3 | 3/3 |
| 2019 | All selected publications | 3 | 3 | 3/3 |
| 2020 | All selected publications | 3 | 3 | 3/3 |
| 2021 | All selected publications | 3 | 3 | 3/3 |
| 2022 | All selected publications | 2 | 3 | 3/3 |
| 2023 | All selected publications | 3 | 3 | 3/3 |
| 2024 | All selected publications | 3 | 3 | 3/3 |
| 2025 | All selected publications | 0 | 3 | 3/3 |
| 2026 | All selected publications | 0 | 3 | 3/3 |
Counts represent citation links, not unique citing papers across a journal: one paper citing two selected articles contributes two links. Older citations outside this window are excluded, so annual sums need not equal lifetime totals. OpenAlex methodology ↗
Publications by publication year. 2026 is an incomplete year.
| Period | Publications |
|---|---|
| 2018 | 1 |
| 2019 | 2 |
Latest Crossref totals for the selected publications; not citations received in the selected years.
Unknown counts are excluded from the mean, median and cited-publication rate.
Same filters, source and counting rules across journals. Descriptive statistics, not a quality ranking.
| Journal / publisher | Publications | Crossref citations | OpenAlex citations | OpenAlex coverage | Crossref mean | Crossref median | Crossref cited %* | Crossref coverage |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| International Journal of Business Ecosystem & Strategy Bussecon International Academy | 1 | 3 | 5 | 1/1 | 3.0 | 3 | 100.0 | 1/1 · 100.0% |
| International Journal of Research in Business and Social Science SSBFNET | 2 | 8 | 12 | 2/2 | 4.0 | 4.0 | 100.0 | 2/2 · 100.0% |
* Percentage among publications with a known citation count.
Managerial innovation as an internal change agent plays a central role in coping with the speed of today’s fast-paced customer demand and highly competitive market, yet previous studies paid less attention to the potential measures of strengthening managerial innovation behavior within organizations. Drawing from transformational leadership theory, the current study shed new light on this issue by examining the role of CEO transformational leadership (TFL), innovation culture (IC) and cross-functional integration (CFI) in advancing managerial innovation behavior in SMEs. A cross-sectional study with a sample of 434 respondents from 24 SMEs operating in Rwanda was conducted. To genuinely analyze the relationship between the variables hypothesized in this study, we used structural equation modeling (SEM) and bootstrapping technique using Amos 23 and SPSS 24. The overall findings revealed that the relationship proposed in the model were significantly supported. However, our new mechanism implying innovation culture and cross-functional integration in the relationship between CEO transformational leadership and managerial innovation behavior, provide a substantial contribution to management literature.
Despite the theoretical foundation that links Transformational leadership (TFL) with innovation behavior, previous studies have overlooked on Transformational leadership and innovation behavior at the individual level relationship but paid less attention to how transformational leadership qualities of top leaders would advance innovative work behavior within the organizational setting. To date, the impact of Transformational leadership at a top executive level on employee’s innovative work behavior (IWB) within an organizational setting has not been dealt with in-depth. However, using transformational leadership theory, this study uncovers the pivotal role of innovation culture (IC) and managerial innovation (MI) in the relationship between CEO transformational leadership and employee’s innovation behavior in SMEs. A cross-sectional design with a total of 434 employees from 24 SMEs operating from Rwanda was analyzed using structural equation modeling to evaluate the relationship between the variables developed in the study. The findings of this study support our hypothesized model.
Supervisory transformational leadership behavior is attracting a widespread interest due to its fundamental quality that spurs subordinate confidence and optimism in the workplace. Although, despite the mounting evidence that links transformational leadership to different organizational and individual innovative outcomes, it is not yet been documented whether transformational leadership (TFL) can strengthen employee’s creative performance behavior in the workplace. Recently, Successful entrepreneurs thrive under competitive pressures in today’s high customer sensitivity to quality and innovative services. Hence, it's now clear that workplace creativity would be a potential solution for driving business success today. Although, the vital role of supervisory transformational leadership behavior in enhancing creative performance behavior of employees has not been dealt with in depth. However, the present paper aims to validate the potential and possible relationship between supervisory transformational leadership style and employee’s creative performance behavior in the workplace. To prove or disprove the assumptions underlined in this study, a cross-sectional research design, was conducted using data from 14 commercial banks operating in Rwanda (412 of total respondents). A variety of methods and tools were employed to examine the relationship between the variables hypothesized in this study. We conducted CFA in SEM-Amos, mean and standard deviation using SPSS and also Hayes macro process to measure the possible effect of each variable in this model. The overall results support our hypothesized model. In this regard, we believe that we have obtained comprehensive results proving and validating the usefulness of our hypothetical model.
Despite the theoretical foundation that links Transformational leadership (TFL) with innovation behavior, previous studies have overlooked on Transformational leadership and innovation behavior at the individual level relationship but paid less attention to how transformational leadership qualities of top leaders would advance innovative work behavior within the organizational setting. To date, the impact of Transformational leadership at a top executive level on employee’s innovative work behavior (IWB) within an organizational setting has not been dealt with in-depth. However, using transformational leadership theory, this study uncovers the pivotal role of innovation culture (IC) and managerial innovation (MI) in the relationship between CEO transformational leadership and employee’s innovation behavior in SMEs. A cross-sectional design with a total of 434 employees from 24 SMEs operating from Rwanda was analyzed using structural equation modeling to evaluate the relationship between the variables developed in the study. The findings of this study support our hypothesized model.
Supervisory transformational leadership behavior is attracting a widespread interest due to its fundamental quality that spurs subordinate confidence and optimism in the workplace. Although, despite the mounting evidence that links transformational leadership to different organizational and individual innovative outcomes, it is not yet been documented whether transformational leadership (TFL) can strengthen employee’s creative performance behavior in the workplace. Recently, Successful entrepreneurs thrive under competitive pressures in today’s high customer sensitivity to quality and innovative services. Hence, it's now clear that workplace creativity would be a potential solution for driving business success today. Although, the vital role of supervisory transformational leadership behavior in enhancing creative performance behavior of employees has not been dealt with in depth. However, the present paper aims to validate the potential and possible relationship between supervisory transformational leadership style and employee’s creative performance behavior in the workplace. To prove or disprove the assumptions underlined in this study, a cross-sectional research design, was conducted using data from 14 commercial banks operating in Rwanda (412 of total respondents). A variety of methods and tools were employed to examine the relationship between the variables hypothesized in this study. We conducted CFA in SEM-Amos, mean and standard deviation using SPSS and also Hayes macro process to measure the possible effect of each variable in this model. The overall results support our hypothesized model. In this regard, we believe that we have obtained comprehensive results proving and validating the usefulness of our hypothetical model.
Managerial innovation as an internal change agent plays a central role in coping with the speed of today’s fast-paced customer demand and highly competitive market, yet previous studies paid less attention to the potential measures of strengthening managerial innovation behavior within organizations. Drawing from transformational leadership theory, the current study shed new light on this issue by examining the role of CEO transformational leadership (TFL), innovation culture (IC) and cross-functional integration (CFI) in advancing managerial innovation behavior in SMEs. A cross-sectional study with a sample of 434 respondents from 24 SMEs operating in Rwanda was conducted. To genuinely analyze the relationship between the variables hypothesized in this study, we used structural equation modeling (SEM) and bootstrapping technique using Amos 23 and SPSS 24. The overall findings revealed that the relationship proposed in the model were significantly supported. However, our new mechanism implying innovation culture and cross-functional integration in the relationship between CEO transformational leadership and managerial innovation behavior, provide a substantial contribution to management literature.
Source coverage refers to this result set; a publication may occur in several sources. Sync times refer to contributing journals.
Missing abstracts: 0 · Missing authors: 0 · Missing publication dates: 0 · Dates without day precision: 0
| Source | Most recent successful journal sync | Latest attempt |
|---|---|---|
| crossref | 21 Oct 2026 07:22 UTC · ijrbs | complete · ijrbs · 21 Oct 2026 07:22 UTC |
| ojs-rest | 21 Oct 2026 07:22 UTC · ijrbs | complete · ijrbs · 21 Oct 2026 06:46 UTC |
| oai-pmh | 20 Oct 2026 19:55 UTC · ijrbs | complete · ijrbs · 20 Oct 2026 19:50 UTC |
| openalex-enrichment | 21 Oct 2026 07:23 UTC · ijrbs | complete · ijrbs · 21 Oct 2026 07:22 UTC |