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: 24 / 24 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 00:01 UTC — 21 Oct 2026 07:23 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.
23 / 24 with data · 1 missing or unmatched. Percentages use all 24 selected publications.
23 / 24 with data · 1 missing or unmatched. Percentages use all 24 selected publications.
24 / 24 with data · 0 missing or unmatched. Percentages use all 24 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2019 | All selected publications | 3 | 3 | 3/3 | 3/3 |
| 2020 | All selected publications | 1 | 1 | 1/1 | 1/1 |
| 2021 | All selected publications | 2 | 2 | 2/2 | 2/2 |
| 2022 | All selected publications | 2 | 2 | 2/2 | 2/2 |
| 2023 | All selected publications | 5 | 5 | 5/5 | 5/5 |
| 2024 | All selected publications | 3 | 3 | 3/3 | 3/3 |
| 2025 | All selected publications | 4 | 4 | 4/4 | 4/4 |
| 2026 | All selected publications | 4 | 4 | 4/4 | 4/4 |
| Publication year | Journal / scope | Crossref citations | Publications | Crossref known | OpenAlex known |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2019 | All selected publications | 3 | 3 | 3/3 | 3/3 |
| 2020 | All selected publications | 0 | 1 | 1/1 | 1/1 |
| 2021 | All selected publications | 4 | 2 | 2/2 | 2/2 |
| 2022 | All selected publications | 6 | 2 | 2/2 | 2/2 |
| 2023 | All selected publications | 15 | 5 | 5/5 | 5/5 |
| 2024 | All selected publications | 0 | 3 | 3/3 | 3/3 |
| 2025 | All selected publications | 5 | 4 | 4/4 | 4/4 |
| 2026 | All selected publications | 2 | 4 | 4/4 | 4/4 |
| Publication year | Journal / scope | OpenAlex citations | Publications | Crossref known | OpenAlex known |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2019 | All selected publications | 19 | 3 | 3/3 | 3/3 |
| 2020 | All selected publications | 0 | 1 | 1/1 | 1/1 |
| 2021 | All selected publications | 5 | 2 | 2/2 | 2/2 |
| 2022 | All selected publications | 8 | 2 | 2/2 | 2/2 |
| 2023 | All selected publications | 20 | 5 | 5/5 | 5/5 |
| 2024 | All selected publications | 0 | 3 | 3/3 | 3/3 |
| 2025 | All selected publications | 5 | 4 | 4/4 | 4/4 |
| 2026 | All selected publications | 2 | 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 24 / 24 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): 2026-10-21T00:01:59.948136+00:00 — 2026-10-21T07:23:08.985350+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 | 24 | 24/24 |
| 2018 | All selected publications | 0 | 24 | 24/24 |
| 2019 | All selected publications | 0 | 24 | 24/24 |
| 2020 | All selected publications | 2 | 24 | 24/24 |
| 2021 | All selected publications | 2 | 24 | 24/24 |
| 2022 | All selected publications | 3 | 24 | 24/24 |
| 2023 | All selected publications | 8 | 24 | 24/24 |
| 2024 | All selected publications | 15 | 24 | 24/24 |
| 2025 | All selected publications | 14 | 24 | 24/24 |
| 2026 | All selected publications | 15 | 24 | 24/24 |
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 |
|---|---|
| 2019 | 3 |
| 2020 | 1 |
| 2021 | 2 |
| 2022 | 2 |
| 2023 | 5 |
| 2024 | 3 |
| 2025 | 4 |
| 2026 | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Bussecon Review of Social Sciences Bussecon International Academy | 2 | 4 | 5 | 2/2 | 2.0 | 2.0 | 50.0 | 2/2 · 100.0% |
| International Journal of Business Ecosystem & Strategy Bussecon International Academy | 2 | 0 | 0 | 2/2 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 2/2 · 100.0% |
| International Journal of Finance & Banking Studies SSBFNET | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1/1 | 0.0 | 0 | 0.0 | 1/1 · 100.0% |
| International Journal of Research in Business and Social Science SSBFNET | 19 | 31 | 54 | 19/19 | 1.63 | 1 | 68.4 | 19/19 · 100.0% |
* Percentage among publications with a known citation count.
The study looked at how the differences in gender and the social setting affect society's perceptions of women’s ability to communicate as leaders. Research shows how culture influences individual thinking, language, communication, and behaviour. The study indicated that gender construct influences individuals’ attitudes, emotions, and behaviours. The same is true for assigned positions in society depending on gender and leadership position. The problem identified cultural aspects of leadership that represent variations in gender norms and communication styles for women in leadership and elements linked to sexual distinction. This article, therefore, focuses on the problems that culture influences gender communication. The research adopted a qualitative approach, a systematic analysis of the literature of the baseline data collected, forming part of a randomised controlled sample collection. The findings indicate the persistent gender discrepancies in communication in several contexts, as women prefer to use more concrete vocabulary in several contexts, emphasising how people can achieve goals, including specifics, and using terms that are easy to imagine. It is no mystery that we are in a period of transformation, and attitudes about sex and gender leadership are changing, therefore, understanding the problems of sexual difference and women’s ability to communicate in leadership can be addressed by creating and strengthening an adequate framework with the condition of a mentality change.
When we hear the word diversity, usually the first word that comes to mind is difference, and diversity steams from difference, in this paper, board diversity is discussed, in addition to linking it to firm performance, diversity is important, and it’s especially important in the board room of a given firm because it allows for different perspectives and opinions which can impact the decision-making process in the firm, which ultimately can affect the performance of the firm. The purpose of this paper is to give a relational guide on how board diversity can greatly impact the achievements of a firm. This paper is a theory-based study and aims to develop a critical approach of defining board diversity and linking that to the performance of the firm. This paper is a theory-based study because it utilizes the existing literature in order to determine the impact of board diversity on firm performance. This study also uses different theories and existing literature to highlight the relevance of having a diverse board in the firm. To find the relation, various studies and existing literature were analyzed to develop a critical approach to relate board diversity to firm performance. In conclusion, this paper outlines different aspects of board diversity while providing a critical look that allows us to assess the importance of board diversity and its connection to firm performance.
This study investigates the relationship between board nationality diversity (BND) and environmental, social, and governance (ESG) in developing countries. It also highlights the role of legitimacy concerns in investigating how foreign ownership moderates the connection between BND and ESG due to the increased liability of foreignness. Using a sample of listed firms in Johannesburg stock exchange (JSE) in South Africa over 2015–2020, our two-step system GMM findings show that board nationality diversity positively affects ESG. Moreover, our study found that foreign ownership strengthens the positive connection between BND and ESG. Our study contributes to the literature by highlighting the importance of legitimacy theory in the dynamic nexus between BND and ESG. The findings of this study have substantial implications for firms, investors, and stakeholders.
This study seeks to determine whether gender diversity in the boardroom improves the financial performance of listed firms in Tanzania by examining theoretical and empirical findings and using 90 firm-year observations of 15 listed firms over six years from 2016–2021 from firms listed at the Dar es Salaam Stock Exchange (DSE). Return on equity (ROE) and Return on asset (ROA) were used as financial performance metrics. This study uses a balanced panel data analysis. The results showed that there was no statistically significant relationship between the percentages of women directors on boards or in executive roles and the financial performance of listed firms in Tanzania as measured by ROA and ROE. The results are inconsistent with theories of agency and resource dependence. The study is restricted to a sample of listed firms from DSE in Tanzania. The scope of future studies should be expanded to include listed firms across the East African region and more explanatory variables such as the Blau index in measuring boardroom gender diversity.
In South Africa, the population composition reveals more females than males. However, the workforce participation data affirms a more male-dominated outlook. Such disparity between male and female workforce participation is especially evident in the law enforcement institutions like police departments. Although the prevailing laws have ensured access to employment opportunities, advancement in leadership roles by female police officers (FPOs) is found to be lacking. In this regard, this study examines the challenges faced by South African women in attaining leadership roles in policing. Furthermore, the study develops a leadership development framework for ensuring the advancement of women in policing. To accomplish this aim, the study acquired information from 8 male and 100 female police officers through questionnaire and interview methods, respectively. Queries were made to understand the experiences, challenges, and ways forward. Results elucidate that there is a lack of strategic policy in place that can ensure the advancement of women as leaders in the policing field in South Africa. Moreover, the overall outlook of male police officers is affected by stereotypical assumptions about females’ strengths and abilities.
Gender inequality remains prevalent in leadership positions within South African schools. Previous research attributes this disparity to socio-cultural factors that hinder women's advancement into leadership roles. However, limited studies have examined the effectiveness of existing gender legislation in promoting equality. This article explores the role of gender legislation in fostering equitable school leadership in selected primary schools in Gauteng. Grounded in an emancipatory paradigm, the study adopts a qualitative approach to gain a comprehensive understanding of the issue. Key participants included the School Governing Bodies as stakeholders during the promotion of school managements, union representatives as observers in ensuring that gender policies are applied effectively, and the district officials involved in recruitment processes. Therefore, consisting of crucial members who play a crucial role in implementing gender legislation during leadership appointments. Data collection methods used in the study were obtained using semi-structured interviews and document analysis, which consisted of gender legislation applicable in the Department of Education. Data was analysed by means of thematic analysis. Findings indicated that the effectiveness of gender legislation largely depends on its implementers, who often fail to adhere to it. Additionally, women are frequently perceived as less effective in handling school disciplinary issues, a key criterion in principal selection, leading to male dominance in middle and senior management positions. The study recommends that the implementation of gender legislation be a collective responsibility of all stakeholders within the Education Department, rather than being left solely to selection panels, which may prioritise personal interests over equitable representation of leadership.
This paper explores the effects of Matriarchal leadership styles on the performance and success of female-led businesses in South Africa, intending to generate insights that support women entrepreneurs in achieving their objectives within a competitive market. Using a Systematic Literature Review, this paper analysed current scholarly articles, reports and studies that examine the relationship between matriarchal leadership and entrepreneurial success. The review process involved source identification, data extraction, critical analysis, and synthesis to develop a comprehensive understanding of the topic. The findings revealed that matriarchal leadership styles significantly enhance business performance by fostering empathy, collaboration and inclusivity, which contribute to supportive work environments, increased productivity and innovation. This paper highlights important managerial and policy implications, recommending that inclusive leadership strengthens team cohesion and organisational effectiveness. The paper is original in addressing the limited adoption of matriarchal leadership due to patriarchal norms, misconceptions, limited research, and organisational resistance to change.
Internationally, the issue of gender equality in higher education has been a serious challenge, particularly in leadership roles. This issue has spread to African countries, including South Africa. Despite the implementation and adaptation of gender equity policies, such as the Employment Equity Act of 1998, women remain underrepresented in both support and academic leadership roles within South African institutions of higher education. Studies have been conducted in this area focusing on examining structural barriers, policy gaps, and gender representation. Still, few have synthesised women’s personal narratives across multiple sources using secondary qualitative data. This current paper exists to address that gap. It further revisits the concept of the glass ceiling by unpacking women's lived experiences of career progression across the sector in recent years. It uses a qualitative approach and relies on secondary data to examine how women experience and respond to institutional barriers. The data were analysed narratively to highlight personal stories, identities, and meaning-making processes of women navigating leadership. The paper found that women in higher education are skilled and committed, but they remain constrained by outdated institutional systems that offer symbolic inclusion and limited support, thereby preventing genuine access to leadership roles. Despite this invisible glass ceiling, women remain strong and resilient, living the meaning of “wathint’ abafazi, wathint’ imbokodo.” (A woman is a rock), they continue to push forward and lead even when the higher education system fails them. Therefore, it recommends that the Department of Higher Education and Training (DHET) strengthen the enforcement of gender equity policies through regular gender audits, leadership development programmes, and accountability mechanisms to promote authentic empowerment and sustainable transformation.
Despite efforts made by the government and organizations with the intent of improving gender equality and promoting women’s participation at the highest levels of management within the financial sector and other male-dominated industries, women still lag significantly. This issue persists despite the prevalence of biases that affect their performance. This study examined the experience of female leaders working within the financial services sector of a South African organization with regards to the availability of access to mentoring and the glass ceiling phenomenon. A qualitative approach of research methodology was employed through the application of semi-structured interviews with an in-depth exploration of the opinions of nine female leaders. Themes were used to identify patterns that emerged with the application of this approach. The study results indicated that the female executives experience numerous difficulties that include inequality during the process of selecting employees, pay disparities between the female and male employees, lack of respect from their fellow workers or employees at their respective institutions of employment, as well as a lack of adequate mentoring programs. Women’s leadership journeys are affected by structural, cultural, and individual barriers. To foster the growth of female leaders, organizations should embrace solid gender equity initiative implementation and promote inclusive cultures at the workplace. This study’s results are useful in designing improved pathways of access and minimizing gender-related barriers within the male-dominated sector
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.
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 19:56 UTC · ijfbs | complete · ijfbs · 20 Oct 2026 19:55 UTC |
| openalex-enrichment | 21 Oct 2026 07:23 UTC · ijrbs | complete · ijrbs · 21 Oct 2026 07:22 UTC |