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: 4 / 4 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: 21 Oct 2026 07:23 UTC — 23 Oct 2026 20:43 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.
4 / 4 with data · 0 missing or unmatched. Percentages use all 4 selected publications.
4 / 4 with data · 0 missing or unmatched. Percentages use all 4 selected publications.
4 / 4 with data · 0 missing or unmatched. Percentages use all 4 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025 | All selected publications | 4 | 4 | 4/4 | 4/4 |
| Publication year | Journal / scope | Crossref citations | Publications | Crossref known | OpenAlex known |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025 | All selected publications | 5 | 4 | 4/4 | 4/4 |
| Publication year | Journal / scope | OpenAlex citations | Publications | Crossref known | OpenAlex known |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025 | All selected publications | 5 | 4 | 4/4 | 4/4 |
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 4 / 4 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): 2026-10-21T07:23:00.753469+00:00 — 2026-10-23T20:43:49.132288+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 | 4 | 4/4 |
| 2018 | All selected publications | 0 | 4 | 4/4 |
| 2019 | All selected publications | 0 | 4 | 4/4 |
| 2020 | All selected publications | 0 | 4 | 4/4 |
| 2021 | All selected publications | 0 | 4 | 4/4 |
| 2022 | All selected publications | 0 | 4 | 4/4 |
| 2023 | All selected publications | 0 | 4 | 4/4 |
| 2024 | All selected publications | 0 | 4 | 4/4 |
| 2025 | All selected publications | 0 | 4 | 4/4 |
| 2026 | All selected publications | 5 | 4 | 4/4 |
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 |
|---|---|
| 2025 | 4 |
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 Research in Business and Social Science SSBFNET | 4 | 5 | 5 | 4/4 | 1.25 | 1.5 | 75.0 | 4/4 · 100.0% |
* Percentage among publications with a known citation count.
Management appointments do not represent gender equality, even though men and women are given equal opportunity. Social conventions and laws have supported male-dominated workplaces. This qualitative, exploratory, descriptive, and contextual study used a phenomenological technique to examine women's management experiences in Ekurhuleni, Gauteng, South Africa. The intended audience was managerial women. Purposive sampling, unstructured individual interviews, and inductive topic analysis were used. Trustworthiness was determined by credibility, transferability, reliability, and confirmability. Promoting autonomy, beneficence, non-maleficence, and justice was ethical. This study found workplace gender bias, male resistance to female leadership, gender intimidation, and a non-supportive work atmosphere. These data may help create workplace recommendations for women in managerial roles.
This study employs a qualitative systematic literature review to examine the barriers and opportunities for women’s leadership in academia, with a particular focus on South African higher education. Secondary data were sourced from peer-reviewed journal articles, books, dissertations, and opinion pieces, ensuring a comprehensive analysis of existing research. A total of 130 studies were reviewed, with data collected and analysed using qualitative content and thematic analysis methods. The findings highlight persistent structural, cultural, and institutional barriers that hinder women's advancement in academic leadership. These include gender bias in recruitment and promotion, the absence of mentorship and support networks, challenges in achieving work-life balance, and the intersectionality of race and gender, which disproportionately affects Black women. Despite the progress made through gender equity policies, the slow pace of transformation within male-dominated academic institutions remains a significant obstacle. However, the study also identifies key opportunities for women in leadership, such as the implementation of gender equity initiatives, the strengthening of mentorship programmes, and the increasing recognition of diverse and inclusive leadership styles within universities. Institutional commitment to gender transformation, alongside global frameworks such as the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), presents a pathway for women to attain leadership positions. The study stresses the need for continued institutional reforms that challenge traditional gender norms, foster mentorship, and promote work-life balance policies to achieve sustainable gender equity in academic leadership.
This research examines the ongoing under-representation of women in leadership positions within South African higher education institutions (HEIs). Despite a considerable increase in the number of women entering academia, their advancement to top leadership roles remained markedly constrained. This study analysed secondary data from forty scholarly articles published between 2010 and 2023 to investigate the intricate impediments obstructing women's advancement, the wider consequences of these challenges, and viable measures for enhancing gender parity in academic leadership. The results indicated that deep-rooted systemic and cultural obstacles, along with an absence of supportive legislation, sustained gender disparities within institutional hierarchies. Proposals for modification encompassed the establishment of explicit trajectories for women's professional advancement, gender-sensitive leadership training initiatives, mentorship programs to assist aspiring female leaders, and revisions to institutional regulations to foster diversity. The study emphasised the necessity for ongoing evaluation of gender equality policies and enhanced accountability mechanisms to guarantee continued advancement towards equitable representation in leadership.
The purpose of the study was to explore the challenges and strategies of cultivating and promoting inclusivity and diversity in the energy sector. Grounded in the interpretivist research paradigm, a qualitative approach was adopted specifically using descriptive multiple case study design. In-depth interviews were conducted from sixteen purposively selected participants from the energy industry in Chipinge district, Zimbabwe. Data was analyzed using the thematic data analysis technique. The study found out that the work environment in the energy industry was partially inclusive. There is evidence of both success stories and challenges with regards to inclusivity in the energy sector. The main challenges faced by the energy sector in promoting inclusivity include resource inadequacies, unconscious biases, resistance to change, communication barriers, tokenism, lack of knowledge and commitment from managers, strategic misalignment, policy deficiency and gender disparities in leadership roles. The strategies that can be employed to cultivate an inclusive work environment are the development of comprehensive policies, cultural transformation through management training, deliberate inclusion in procurement and infrastructure design, regular employee surveys, inclusive leadership programs, and mentorship initiatives. The findings contribute to the broader discourse on fostering inclusivity in the workplace by equipping all stakeholders with full knowledge and understanding of inclusive workplace dynamics. The study also contributes to the body of knowledge by shedding light on the challenges faced by the energy sector and strategies for accelerating the embracing of inclusivity in the energy sector. Furthermore, the study adds to the underexplored discourse of diversity management in Southern Africa and brings a grounded qualitative voice to the broader literature.
Management appointments do not represent gender equality, even though men and women are given equal opportunity. Social conventions and laws have supported male-dominated workplaces. This qualitative, exploratory, descriptive, and contextual study used a phenomenological technique to examine women's management experiences in Ekurhuleni, Gauteng, South Africa. The intended audience was managerial women. Purposive sampling, unstructured individual interviews, and inductive topic analysis were used. Trustworthiness was determined by credibility, transferability, reliability, and confirmability. Promoting autonomy, beneficence, non-maleficence, and justice was ethical. This study found workplace gender bias, male resistance to female leadership, gender intimidation, and a non-supportive work atmosphere. These data may help create workplace recommendations for women in managerial roles.
This study employs a qualitative systematic literature review to examine the barriers and opportunities for women’s leadership in academia, with a particular focus on South African higher education. Secondary data were sourced from peer-reviewed journal articles, books, dissertations, and opinion pieces, ensuring a comprehensive analysis of existing research. A total of 130 studies were reviewed, with data collected and analysed using qualitative content and thematic analysis methods. The findings highlight persistent structural, cultural, and institutional barriers that hinder women's advancement in academic leadership. These include gender bias in recruitment and promotion, the absence of mentorship and support networks, challenges in achieving work-life balance, and the intersectionality of race and gender, which disproportionately affects Black women. Despite the progress made through gender equity policies, the slow pace of transformation within male-dominated academic institutions remains a significant obstacle. However, the study also identifies key opportunities for women in leadership, such as the implementation of gender equity initiatives, the strengthening of mentorship programmes, and the increasing recognition of diverse and inclusive leadership styles within universities. Institutional commitment to gender transformation, alongside global frameworks such as the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), presents a pathway for women to attain leadership positions. The study stresses the need for continued institutional reforms that challenge traditional gender norms, foster mentorship, and promote work-life balance policies to achieve sustainable gender equity in academic leadership.
The purpose of the study was to explore the challenges and strategies of cultivating and promoting inclusivity and diversity in the energy sector. Grounded in the interpretivist research paradigm, a qualitative approach was adopted specifically using descriptive multiple case study design. In-depth interviews were conducted from sixteen purposively selected participants from the energy industry in Chipinge district, Zimbabwe. Data was analyzed using the thematic data analysis technique. The study found out that the work environment in the energy industry was partially inclusive. There is evidence of both success stories and challenges with regards to inclusivity in the energy sector. The main challenges faced by the energy sector in promoting inclusivity include resource inadequacies, unconscious biases, resistance to change, communication barriers, tokenism, lack of knowledge and commitment from managers, strategic misalignment, policy deficiency and gender disparities in leadership roles. The strategies that can be employed to cultivate an inclusive work environment are the development of comprehensive policies, cultural transformation through management training, deliberate inclusion in procurement and infrastructure design, regular employee surveys, inclusive leadership programs, and mentorship initiatives. The findings contribute to the broader discourse on fostering inclusivity in the workplace by equipping all stakeholders with full knowledge and understanding of inclusive workplace dynamics. The study also contributes to the body of knowledge by shedding light on the challenges faced by the energy sector and strategies for accelerating the embracing of inclusivity in the energy sector. Furthermore, the study adds to the underexplored discourse of diversity management in Southern Africa and brings a grounded qualitative voice to the broader literature.
This research examines the ongoing under-representation of women in leadership positions within South African higher education institutions (HEIs). Despite a considerable increase in the number of women entering academia, their advancement to top leadership roles remained markedly constrained. This study analysed secondary data from forty scholarly articles published between 2010 and 2023 to investigate the intricate impediments obstructing women's advancement, the wider consequences of these challenges, and viable measures for enhancing gender parity in academic leadership. The results indicated that deep-rooted systemic and cultural obstacles, along with an absence of supportive legislation, sustained gender disparities within institutional hierarchies. Proposals for modification encompassed the establishment of explicit trajectories for women's professional advancement, gender-sensitive leadership training initiatives, mentorship programs to assist aspiring female leaders, and revisions to institutional regulations to foster diversity. The study emphasised the necessity for ongoing evaluation of gender equality policies and enhanced accountability mechanisms to guarantee continued advancement towards equitable representation in leadership.
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 |