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: 2 / 2 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 07:22 UTC — 22 Oct 2026 02:07 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.
2 / 2 with data · 0 missing or unmatched. Percentages use all 2 selected publications.
2 / 2 with data · 0 missing or unmatched. Percentages use all 2 selected publications.
2 / 2 with data · 0 missing or unmatched. Percentages use all 2 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2022 | All selected publications | 2 | 2 | 2/2 | 2/2 |
| Publication year | Journal / scope | Crossref citations | Publications | Crossref known | OpenAlex known |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2022 | All selected publications | 4 | 2 | 2/2 | 2/2 |
| Publication year | Journal / scope | OpenAlex citations | Publications | Crossref known | OpenAlex known |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2022 | All selected publications | 6 | 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 2 / 2 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): 2026-10-21T07:22:46.035746+00:00 — 2026-10-22T02:07:44.018576+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 | 2 | 2/2 |
| 2018 | All selected publications | 0 | 2 | 2/2 |
| 2019 | All selected publications | 0 | 2 | 2/2 |
| 2020 | All selected publications | 0 | 2 | 2/2 |
| 2021 | All selected publications | 0 | 2 | 2/2 |
| 2022 | All selected publications | 1 | 2 | 2/2 |
| 2023 | All selected publications | 0 | 2 | 2/2 |
| 2024 | All selected publications | 5 | 2 | 2/2 |
| 2025 | All selected publications | 0 | 2 | 2/2 |
| 2026 | All selected publications | 0 | 2 | 2/2 |
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 |
|---|---|
| 2022 | 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 | 4 | 5 | 1/1 | 4.0 | 4 | 100.0 | 1/1 · 100.0% |
| International Journal of Research in Business and Social Science SSBFNET | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1/1 | 0.0 | 0 | 0.0 | 1/1 · 100.0% |
* Percentage among publications with a known citation count.
This paper discusses how a Strategic Plan (SP) can be monitored and evaluated using the balanced scorecard (BSC). The BSC is a useful tool that is based on four measures: the financial measures emphasize cost efficiency and high profitability; the customer measure considers the ability of the firm to provide quality services to the customer; the internal business processes measure focuses on the internal processes that lead to financial success and customer satisfaction, while learning and growth measure include the ability of the employees’ quality of information systems, leadership, the culture, and alignment to teamwork processes. This paper employed both quantitative and qualitative methods to collect data. The SP’s operational objectives were aligned with the four measures of the BSC. Each measure was given a score that formed the basis of evaluation and analysis. The results show that the SP scored an aggregate of 71%, which is a fair score. The highest score was found in the learning and growth measure, followed by internal processes then the customer service, and lastly the financial measure. The scores are consistent with a non-profit making enterprise. This paper concludes that the BSC is a perfect tool for the evaluation of an SP.
The study sought to examine the effect of Accounting Information and Communication control on the financial performance of Sacco’s in Kenya. The study employed a mixed research design targeting 175 Sacco’s with 875 respondents. A purposive sampling technique was used to select the CEOs, Finance Managers, Risk Managers, ICT Managers and Internal auditors. Data were collected by the use of both primary and secondary techniques. Primary data collection was using questionnaires, while secondary data detailed document analysis of audited accounts to capture information on financial performance. A pilot study was conducted in Nairobi County. Content and construct validity were tested at a KMO value of 0.870, which signified that factor analysis was appropriate. Cronbach Alpha was applied to establish reliability, ranging from 0.859 for accounting information and communication control to 0.916 for financial performance. Data were analyzed by use of descriptive and inferential statistics. Descriptive analysis included; frequencies, Mean, Standard deviation and percentage, while inferential analysis involved regression analysis. The results showed a significant positive relationship between Accounting Information and Communication control and financial performance (r=0.661, P=0.000). Accounting Information and Communication control explained 43.7% (R2 =0.437) of variance in financial performance; the beta value for Accounting Information and Communication control from the regression model was 0.551 at p< 0.05. The study concluded that Accounting Information and Communication control has a significant positive effect on financial performance. The study recommended that SACCOs conduct periodic reviews of the effectiveness of its accounting information and communication system to ensure management receives timely, relevant, and reliable reports for decision-making.
The study sought to examine the effect of Accounting Information and Communication control on the financial performance of Sacco’s in Kenya. The study employed a mixed research design targeting 175 Sacco’s with 875 respondents. A purposive sampling technique was used to select the CEOs, Finance Managers, Risk Managers, ICT Managers and Internal auditors. Data were collected by the use of both primary and secondary techniques. Primary data collection was using questionnaires, while secondary data detailed document analysis of audited accounts to capture information on financial performance. A pilot study was conducted in Nairobi County. Content and construct validity were tested at a KMO value of 0.870, which signified that factor analysis was appropriate. Cronbach Alpha was applied to establish reliability, ranging from 0.859 for accounting information and communication control to 0.916 for financial performance. Data were analyzed by use of descriptive and inferential statistics. Descriptive analysis included; frequencies, Mean, Standard deviation and percentage, while inferential analysis involved regression analysis. The results showed a significant positive relationship between Accounting Information and Communication control and financial performance (r=0.661, P=0.000). Accounting Information and Communication control explained 43.7% (R2 =0.437) of variance in financial performance; the beta value for Accounting Information and Communication control from the regression model was 0.551 at p< 0.05. The study concluded that Accounting Information and Communication control has a significant positive effect on financial performance. The study recommended that SACCOs conduct periodic reviews of the effectiveness of its accounting information and communication system to ensure management receives timely, relevant, and reliable reports for decision-making.
This paper discusses how a Strategic Plan (SP) can be monitored and evaluated using the balanced scorecard (BSC). The BSC is a useful tool that is based on four measures: the financial measures emphasize cost efficiency and high profitability; the customer measure considers the ability of the firm to provide quality services to the customer; the internal business processes measure focuses on the internal processes that lead to financial success and customer satisfaction, while learning and growth measure include the ability of the employees’ quality of information systems, leadership, the culture, and alignment to teamwork processes. This paper employed both quantitative and qualitative methods to collect data. The SP’s operational objectives were aligned with the four measures of the BSC. Each measure was given a score that formed the basis of evaluation and analysis. The results show that the SP scored an aggregate of 71%, which is a fair score. The highest score was found in the learning and growth measure, followed by internal processes then the customer service, and lastly the financial measure. The scores are consistent with a non-profit making enterprise. This paper concludes that the BSC is a perfect tool for the evaluation of an SP.
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 |