Deciding to be ignored: Why accounting scholars use dubious quality research outlets in a neocolonial context

Abstract

This study examines accounting scholars’ decision-making when engaging with research outlets of dubious quality within the Indonesian education neocolonialist reform context. Using researcher experiences, the focus adopted is first to understand country-wide reforms and second to consider the individual scholar’s level within a university. Dominant in the case are sector-wide suites of performance measurement and funding reforms coupled with an explosion of predatory publishing opportunities. This potent mix of change has produced organizational behavior that is not in the interest of scholars or their research institutions. Using three data sets (documentary; survey; and, autoethnography) the findings are that: Indonesia’s objective to produce ‘international research’ has had dysfunctional impacts at the level of individual scholars; an explosion in predatory publishing in Indonesia has been mostly ‘ignored’; an overly ambitious and unattainable research performance management regime has contributed to scholars and their departments resorting to dubious outlets; and, scholars have adopted a strategic ignorance of dubious quality research in their responses to the pressures placed upon them by the performance management regime. Emancipatory reforms are called for by dismantling Indonesia’s neocolonialist reforms and replacing them with a regime that respects indigenous research.