World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Business and Management

D-Index
30
Citations
4066
World Ranking
2994
National Ranking
29

Geert Poels publication distribution in Business and Management in 2026

The chart shows the distribution of publications by all Research.com ranked scientists in the field of Business and Management in 2026. The highlighted bar marks where Geert Poels sits on this spectrum.

35–39 publications: 2 scientists 40–44 publications: 2 scientists 45–49 publications: 5 scientists 50–54 publications: 20 scientists 55–59 publications: 39 scientists 60–64 publications: 66 scientists 65–69 publications: 52 scientists 70–74 publications: 80 scientists 75–79 publications: 83 scientists 80–84 publications: 116 scientists 85–89 publications: 94 scientists 90–94 publications: 111 scientists 95–99 publications: 122 scientists 100–104 publications: 104 scientists 105–109 publications: 113 scientists 110–114 publications: 96 scientists 115–119 publications: 97 scientists 120–124 publications: 112 scientists 125–129 publications: 93 scientists 130–134 publications: 79 scientists 135–139 publications: 69 scientists 140–144 publications: 80 scientists 145–149 publications: 81 scientists 150–154 publications: 85 scientists 155–159 publications: 50 scientists 160–164 publications: 74 scientists 165–169 publications: 61 scientists 170–174 publications: 40 scientists 175–179 publications: 44 scientists 180–184 publications: 47 scientists 185–189 publications: 59 scientists 190–194 publications: 35 scientists 195–199 publications: 37 scientists 200–204 publications: 49 scientists 205–209 publications: 48 scientists 210–214 publications: 34 scientists 215–219 publications: 31 scientists 220–224 publications: 37 scientists 225–229 publications: 34 scientists 230–234 publications: 25 scientists 235–239 publications: 28 scientists 240–244 publications: 34 scientists 245–249 publications: 28 scientists 250–254 publications: 23 scientists 255–259 publications: 22 scientists 260–264 publications: 11 scientists 265–269 publications: 16 scientists 270–274 publications: 23 scientists 275–279 publications: 12 scientists 280–284 publications: 16 scientists 285–289 publications: 10 scientists 290–294 publications: 12 scientists 295–299 publications: 12 scientists 300–304 publications: 8 scientists 305–309 publications: 13 scientists 310–314 publications: 13 scientists 315–319 publications: 6 scientists 320–324 publications: 10 scientists 325–329 publications: 9 scientists 330–334 publications: 7 scientists 335–339 publications: 10 scientists 340–344 publications: 10 scientists 345–349 publications: 7 scientists 350–354 publications: 4 scientists 355–359 publications: 10 scientists 360–364 publications: 3 scientists 365–369 publications: 7 scientists 370–374 publications: 2 scientists 375–379 publications: 8 scientists 380–384 publications: 4 scientists 385–389 publications: 5 scientists 390–394 publications: 5 scientists 395–399 publications: 2 scientists 400–404 publications: 2 scientists 405–409 publications: 4 scientists 410–414 publications: 3 scientists 415–419 publications: 2 scientists 420–424 publications: 5 scientists 425–429 publications: 3 scientists 430–434 publications: 1 scientists 435 publications: 1 scientists 436+ publications: 100 scientists
35 publications 436+

This scientist: 314 publications — 92nd percentile

92% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

The last bar groups every scientist with 436 publications or more.

Geert Poels D-index placement in Business and Management in 2026

The chart shows the D-index (discipline H-index) distribution of Business and Management scientists ranked by Research.com in 2026. The highlighted bar marks where Geert Poels sits on this spectrum.

30 D-Index: 156 scientists 31 D-Index: 159 scientists 32 D-Index: 171 scientists 33 D-Index: 161 scientists 34 D-Index: 135 scientists 35 D-Index: 124 scientists 36 D-Index: 114 scientists 37 D-Index: 111 scientists 38 D-Index: 103 scientists 39 D-Index: 89 scientists 40 D-Index: 81 scientists 41 D-Index: 97 scientists 42 D-Index: 80 scientists 43 D-Index: 69 scientists 44 D-Index: 68 scientists 45 D-Index: 63 scientists 46 D-Index: 54 scientists 47 D-Index: 69 scientists 48 D-Index: 50 scientists 49 D-Index: 58 scientists 50 D-Index: 54 scientists 51 D-Index: 62 scientists 52 D-Index: 54 scientists 53 D-Index: 43 scientists 54 D-Index: 49 scientists 55 D-Index: 35 scientists 56 D-Index: 40 scientists 57 D-Index: 44 scientists 58 D-Index: 34 scientists 59 D-Index: 29 scientists 60 D-Index: 48 scientists 61 D-Index: 32 scientists 62 D-Index: 30 scientists 63 D-Index: 22 scientists 64 D-Index: 22 scientists 65 D-Index: 19 scientists 66 D-Index: 20 scientists 67 D-Index: 18 scientists 68 D-Index: 17 scientists 69 D-Index: 21 scientists 70 D-Index: 20 scientists 71 D-Index: 19 scientists 72 D-Index: 14 scientists 73 D-Index: 10 scientists 74 D-Index: 16 scientists 75 D-Index: 24 scientists 76 D-Index: 13 scientists 77 D-Index: 19 scientists 78 D-Index: 8 scientists 79 D-Index: 6 scientists 80 D-Index: 4 scientists 81 D-Index: 12 scientists 82 D-Index: 7 scientists 83 D-Index: 7 scientists 84 D-Index: 6 scientists 85 D-Index: 10 scientists 86 D-Index: 4 scientists 87 D-Index: 11 scientists 88 D-Index: 6 scientists 89+ D-Index: 96 scientists
30 D-Index 89+

This scientist: 30 D-Index — 5th percentile

5% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

The last bar groups every scientist with 89 D-Index or more.

Best Publications

  • Defining business process maturity. A journey towards excellence

    Amy Van Looy;Manu De Backer;Geert Poels

  • A conceptual modeling quality framework

    H. James Nelson;Geert Poels;Marcela Genero;Mario Piattini

  • Evaluating quality of conceptual modelling scripts based on user perceptions

    Ann Maes;Geert Poels

  • A conceptual framework and classification of capability areas for business process maturity

    Amy Van Looy;Manu De Backer;Geert Poels

  • Defining and validating metrics for assessing the understandability of entity-relationship diagrams

    Marcela Genero;Geert Poels;Mario Piattini

  • Case Studies in research: Choosing the right business process maturity model

    Amy Van Looy;Amy Van Looy;Manu De Backer;Geert Poels;Monique Snoeck

  • Process Mining and the ProM Framework: An Exploratory Survey

    Jan Claes;Geert Poels

  • Research Review: A Systematic Literature Review on the Quality of UML Models

    Mario Piattini;Geert Poels;Marcela Genero;Ana M. Fernández-Saez

  • Tying process model quality to the modeling process: the impact of structuring, movement, and speed

    Jan Claes;Irene Vanderfeesten;Hajo A. Reijers;Jakob Pinggera

  • Phishing Happens Beyond Technology: The Effects of Human Behaviors and Demographics on Each Step of a Phishing Process

    Hossein Abroshan;Jan Devos;Geert Poels;Eric Laermans

  • Enterprise Architecture for Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises: A Starting Point for Bringing EA to SMEs, Based on Adoption Models

    Maxime Bernaert;Geert Poels;Monique Snoeck;Manu Backer

  • Enterprise architecture for small and medium-sized enterprises: a starting point for bringing EA to SMEs, based on adoption models

    Maxime Bernaert;Geert Poels;Monique Snoeck;Manu De Backer

  • Evaluating business process maturity models

    Amy Van Looy;Geert Poels;Monique Snoeck

  • DISTANCE: a framework for software measure construction

    Geert Poels;Guido Dedene

  • Evaluating quality of conceptual models based on user perceptions

    Ann Maes;Geert Poels

  • Evaluating Quality of Conceptual Models Based on User Perceptions

    Ann Maes;Geert Poels

  • Advances in Conceptual Modeling - Theory and Practice

    John F. Roddick;V. Richard Benjamins;Samira Si-said Cherfi;Roger Chiang

  • Measures for assessing dynamic complexity aspects of object-oriented conceptual schemes

    Geert Poels;Guido Dedene

  • Ambiguity in user stories: A systematic literature review

    Unknown

  • The pragmatic quality of Resources‐ Events‐Agents diagrams: an experimental evaluation

    Geert Poels;Ann Maes;Frederik Gailly;Roland Paemeleire

Frequent Co-Authors

Mario Piattini
Mario Piattini University of Castilla-La Mancha
Marcela Genero
Marcela Genero University of Castilla-La Mancha
Coral Calero
Coral Calero University of Castilla-La Mancha
Oscar Pastor
Oscar Pastor Universitat Politècnica de València
Houari Sahraoui
Houari Sahraoui University of Montreal
Barbara Weber
Barbara Weber University of St. Gallen
Giancarlo Guizzardi
Giancarlo Guizzardi University of Twente
Jorge Cardoso
Jorge Cardoso University of Coimbra
John F. Roddick
John F. Roddick Flinders University
Ramez Elmasri
Ramez Elmasri The University of Texas at Arlington

If you think any of the details on this page are incorrect, let us know.

Report an issue

We appreciate your kind effort to assist us to improve this page, it would be helpful providing us with as much detail as possible in the text box below:

Best Scientists Citing Geert Poels

Recently Published Articles