Retailing, warehousing and producing knowledge are the core missions of the academic scholars in the universities. Universities "warehouse” knowledge through libraries; they disseminate or "retail" knowledge via their teaching function; and they produce or “manufacture” knowledge through research (Hunt, 2000). In order to accomplish these missions, namely to enhance the production and dissemination quantum of the knowledge, governmental institutions and university administrations use incentive and reward systems (Bloom et al., 1988). These systems present in most universities acknowledge publications and citations as the evidence of scholarly achievement and necessity for promotion, grant, and tenure (Darko, 2003). However, incentive and reward systems in academia were considered to lead a publish or perish syndrome by keeping the academic staff under pressure (Bloom et al., 1988). On the one hand, these systems lead to a an increase in the quantity of books and papers (Bloom et al., 1988); on the other hand, the quality of the generated knowledge may decrease since the academics aim to reach maximum number of publications (Nyilasy et al., 2007). As it is seen, these systems have both advantageous and disadvantageous. In this context, the objective of this paper is to analyze whether the incentive and reward systems have institutionalized a restrictive approach to knowledge development or they enhance and encourage the producing of the knowledge. On the other hand, it will be tried to compare the Turkey’s current academic environment with the other countries in the context of ethical academic behaviours.
THE OBJECTIVE OF ACADEMICS
Marketing as a university discipline has several responsibilities such as; to society, for providing objective knowledge and technically competent, socially responsible, liberally educated graduates; to students, for providing an education that will enable them to get on the “socioeconomic ladder” and prepare them for their roles as competent, responsible marketers and citizens; to marketing practice, for providing a continuing supply of competent, responsible entrants to the marketing profession and for providing new knowledge about both the micro and macro dimensions of marketing; and to the academy, for upholding its mission of retailing, warehousing and producing knowledge, its contract with society of objective knowledge for academic freedom, and its core values of reason, evidence, openness and civility (Hunt, 2002, p. 306). In parallel with this view, Irele (1993, p. 74) claimed that “A university has three functions to perform which are to conserve knowledge; to advance knowledge; and to disseminate knowledge. It falls short of the full realization of its aim unless, having provided for the conservation and advancement of knowledge, it makes provision for its dissemination as well”. It can be revealed from these statements that, production and dissemination of the knowledge are two of the core missions of universities.
Knowledge produced by academic researchers tends to be distributed to the discipline through research books, journals, academic conferences, training and development courses ((Bloom et al., 1988; McKenzie et al., 2002; Nyilasy et al., 2007). However, according to the American Marketing Association (as of now AMA) Task Force on the development of marketing, academic researchers do not produce and disseminate enough publications (Bloom et al., 1988). Furthermore, there is a dissemination problem that academicians are not successful in disseminating the knowledge they generate (Nyilasy et al., 2007). In order to overcome these problems and increase the production and dissemination of knowledge, and also to become more competitive, university management boards apply incentive and reward systems (Bloom et al., 1988).
INCENTIVE AND REWARDS SYSTEMS
At first sight, the incentive and reward systems may...