Western Libraries

Journal Rankings in Business

The purpose of this list is to provide in one place articles about the ranking and rating of journals in the broad fields of business and management.

It consists of three sections:
I) An alphabetical list of all articles by author;
II) Lists of articles presented
in reverse chronological order (newest to oldest) by subject
III) Related web sites.

If abstracts were found, they accompany the citations in the subject listings. If we were able to link to an electronic version of the complete article, we have done so. Access to the full text may be restricted to members of Western University community in accordance with the legal requirements of the database vendors.
To go directly to the subject that interests you, click on the links below. To go directly to the database upon which most rankings are based click here: ISI's Journal Citation Reports. (or choose the Web of Knowledge from the list of databases available via the Western Libraries. (For a related library guide on “How To  Find a Journal’s Impact Factor” see: http://www.lib.uwo.ca/tutorials/howtofindanimpactfactor

1) This guide was last updated in January 2012.
2) The primary focus is on ‘business’ journals. Articles related to the rankings of      publications in other disciplines and those about the theoretical aspects of subjects such as ‘impact factors’ have been excluded.
3) The subject of ‘business’ has been divided below into 8 categories (Accounting, MIS, etc.). In those instances where the article is using journals in a particular category to discuss the broader issue of journal rankings, we have typically placed the article in the ‘General’ category.

As of 2009 JSTOR will be known as Ithaka. Read this news release outlining the merger and resulting name change. References to items being available in JSTOR will be available through Ithaka.

I. Articles in Alphabetical Order by Author: See associated list.

II. Articles by Subject Area
(presented in reverse chronological order)
(abstracts are provided if available)



Kam, C. Chan; et al.
“Ranking Accounting Journals Using Dissertation Citation Analysis: A Research Note,”
Accounting, Organizations and Society (October 2009), 34 (6-7), pg. 875-885


Prior literature on accounting journal rankings has provided different journal lists depending on the type of examination (citations- vs. survey-based) and the choice of journals covered. A recent study by Bonner, Hesford, Van der Stede, and Young (2006) [Bonner, S., Hesford, A., Van der Stede, W. A., & Young, M. S. (2006). The most influential journals in academic accounting. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 31(7), 663–685] documents disproportionately more citations in the financial accounting area, suggesting a financial accounting bias in the accounting literature. We use citations from accounting dissertations completed during 1999–2003 to provide a ranking of accounting journals. The database allows us to assess the research interests of new accounting scholars and the literature sources they draw from. Another innovation is our ranking of accounting journals based on specialty areas (auditing, financial, managerial, tax, systems, and other) and research methods (archival, experimental, modeling, survey, and other). To mitigate the financial accounting bias documented by Bonner et al. (2006) , we derive a ranking metric by scaling (normalizing) the journal citations by the number of dissertations within each specialty area and research method. Overall, the top journals are, JAR, AOS, TAR, and JAE. We also provide evidence that top journal rankings do vary by specialty area as well as by research methods.

Attaway, Alan N.  Sidney J Baxendale,  Benjamin P Foster,  Julia N Karcher. "Reassessing Accounting Faculty Scholarly Expectations: Journal Classification by Author Affiliation" . Academy of Educational Leadership Journal. 2008.  Vol. 12,  Iss. 3,  p. 71-86 (16 pp.)
An extensive literature exists that determines accounting journal rankings and top research producers both individually and by program. While this research stream provides valuable insights to the Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of Business International (AACSB) accredited programs and to programs working to achieve such accreditation, it frequently is based on quality perceptions or considers top-rated programs only. This study extends previous research by reviewing authorship by faculty at a wider range of institutions. The results of this study suggest that lists based on the "top" journals may be unrealistic for many institutions. The information provided in this manuscript should assist programs, program leaders, and faculty members address AACSB accreditation issues, promotion and tenure decisions, and annual faculty evaluations.

Bonner, S.E. et al.
“The Most Influential Journals in Academic Accounting,”
Accounting, Organizations and Society (October 2006), 31 (7), pg. 663-685

In this article we summarize the findings of articles that have ranked academic accounting journals, as well as articles that provide other bases for considering journal quality. Results indicate that five journals-Accounting, Organizations and Society, Contemporary Accounting Research, Journal of Accounting and Economics, Journal of Accounting Research, and The Accounting Review-rank consistently as the top journals in the field. However, these five journals differ substantially as to the numbers of articles they publish overall as well as the proportions of articles that are related to the various specialty areas of accounting. Further, the relative proportions of articles by area do not correspond to the numbers of individuals working in the specialty areas. Financial accounting articles appear in disproportionately high numbers for all journals except Accounting, Organizations and Society, whereas management accounting articles appear in disproportionately low numbers for all journals except Accounting, Organizations and Society. In all journals, systems and tax articles also appear to be disproportionately low vis-a-vis the numbers of individuals working in these areas. Auditing receives fairly even exposure across journals and vis-a-vis individuals in the area, except in the Journal of Accounting and Economics.

Glover, S.M. Prawitt, D.F. & Wood , D.A. (2006) Publication Records of Faculty Promoted at the Top 75 Accounting Research Programs
Website at http://marriottschool.byu.edu/emp/GloverPrawittWood/ provides additional data and analysis.

This paper presents a descriptive analysis of the publication records of faculty promoted from 1995 to 2003 at the top 75 accounting research programs (as ranked by Trieschmann, et al. 2000). The presentation and analyses of these data are designed to be useful to faculty and evaluation committees from a benchmarking and decision-making perspective. From a benchmarking perspective, the results will be useful in helping schools as they develop or refine relevant policies and research expectations. The results may be particularly useful in view of the fact that average accounting faculty publication records differ from the average publication records of faculty in other disciplines. We present results in different ways to help faculty and evaluation committees understand faculty publication records at the time accounting faculty are promoted to associate and full professor at various sets, or portfolios, of universities. Not surprisingly, the results indicate significant differences in publication records across the accounting programs included in the study. While differences are expected given the varied missions and emphases of different schools, we believe the data will be useful to policy makers, evaluation committees, and faculty as they set standards, evaluate performance, and plan scholarship activities in conjunction with other expected activities, such as teaching and service.

Beattie, Vivien & Alan Goodacre, (2006) " A New Method for Ranking Academic Journals in Accounting and Finance," Accounting and Business Research, Vol.36, No.2,, p.65.
Given the many and varied uses to which journal rankings are put, interest in ranking journal 'quality' is likely to persist. Unfortunately, existing methods of constructing such rankings all have inherent limitations. This paper proposes a now (complementary) approach, based on submission to RAE 2001, which is not restricted to a pre-defined journal set and, importantly, is based on quality choice decisions driven by economic incentives. For three metrics, submissions to RAE 2001 are compared with the available set of publications to provide evidence on the perception of journal quality, a fourth metric is based on the overall RAE grades, and an overall ranking is produced.

Reinstein, Alan. and Thomas G Calderon. (2006) " Examining Accounting Departments' Rankings of the Quality of Accounting Journals", Critical Perspectives on Accounting, Vol. 17, Iss. 4, p. 457-490.
Given the importance of research productivity to the tenure, promotion, merit raise processes and growth of the cognitive foundation of the accounting discipline, developing valid criteria for assessing the quality of accounting journals seems indispensable. While many studies have examined the quality of accounting and related journals, they relied mainly on surveys of the perceptions of faculty, accounting program chairs or deans. No study has yet ascertained the rankings that accounting departments actually use in evaluating journal quality. Moreover, few studies that examine journal quality have been published in the last decade. With the American Accounting Association's support and using a survey of accounting programs, we examine how accounting programs actually assess the quality of accounting journals. We document the rankings used by both doctoral-granting and non-doctoral-granting accounting programs, and confirm the existence of an elite set of journals whose rankings are invariant to school type, faculty size, resource base or mission. We interpret this as evidence of the influence of a select group of elite accounting programs in defining the parameters of value in accounting scholarship, which we observe can be detrimental to the scholarship of application, integration and teaching in accounting. Our results offer insight into why accounting departments use (or do not use) journal rankings and presents detailed results that can help develop reasonable criteria for assessing research and scholarship. [PUBLICATION ABSTRACT]

Jones, Michael J. & Roydon A. Roberts, "International Publishing Patterns: An Investigation of Leading UK and US Accounting and Finance Journals," Journal of Business , Finance and Accounting, June 2005, Vol.32, No.5-6, pp,1107-1140,
Abstract: Research quality is often measured by the quality of the journals in which articles are published. This article looks at 1,867 articles published in six highly rated UK and six highly rated US academic journals from 1996 to 2000. The authors publishing in the UK journals come mainly from UK and US institutions, but just over a third come from other countries. However, almost ninety per cent of authors publishing in top US journals come from US institutions. Contributions from authors from institutions in non English speaking countries in these top journals are rare. The implications of this research are that although accounting is growing increasingly international, academic research, especially in the top US journals remains stubbornly nationally orientated.

Chan, K. C., Chen, C. R.& Cheng, L. T. W.. Ranking Research Productivity in Accounting for Asia-Pacific Universities.Review of Quantitative Finance & Accounting, Feb2005, 24 , (1), p47-64
Using a set of 18 accounting journals and a sub-set of top five journals from 1991 to 2002, we rank the research productivity in accounting for a total of 119 Asia-Pacific universities. For the whole sampling period, the top five universities are the University of New South Wales, Hong Kong University of Science and Technology, Nanyang Technological University, the University of Sydney, and City University of Hong Kong. A number of prominent universities with long school history are not ranked in the top 20. During the second half of the sampling period, Hong Kong and Singaporean universities have shown the most improvement while some Australian universities have exhibited decline in research output. Also, Hong Kong University of Science and Technology replaces University of New South Wales as the first-ranked university in the period of 1997-2002. When compared with other North American universities, the accounting productivity of the top 20 Asia-Pacific institutions is comparable with that of leading universities in North America. The comparison is even more favorable to the Asia-Pacific universities during the period of 1997-2002.


Ballas, Apostolos and Theoharakis,Vasilis., "Exploring Diversity in Accounting through Faculty Journal Perceptions",Contemporary Accounting Research, Vol 20 No 4 Winter / hiver 2003 (Available in paper in Business Library)
The accounting research community has frequently been described as being both diverse and focused on local issues. At the same time, increasing pressure is being placed on researchers to publish in internationally highly regarded journals. Since faculty evaluations depend on journal rankings, such rankings need to take into account the diversity of the research community. Therefore, this study examines how contextual factors such as a researcher's location and research orientation may influence journal quality perceptions and readership patterns based on an international sample of 1,230 accounting academics. The perceived quality of journals is measured across a number of dimensions, including journal familiarity, average rank position, percent of respondents who classify a journal as top tier, and readership. The results support that a significant variation in journal quality perceptions exists based on a researcher's geographic origin, research orientation, and affiliation with a journal.

Bonner, Sarah, Hesford, Amer, A Van der Stede, Wim, and Young, S. Mark. "The most influential journals in academic accounting" (2006) Accounting, Organizations and Society, Oct 2006. Vol. 31, Iss. 7, p. 663
"In this article we summarize the findings of articles that have ranked academic accounting journals, as well as articles that provide other bases for considering journal quality. Results indicate that five journals-Accounting, Organizations and Society, Contemporary Accounting Research, Journal of Accounting and Economics, Journal of Accounting Research, and The Accounting Review-rank consistently as the top journals in the field. However, these five journals differ substantially as to the numbers of articles they publish overall as well as the proportions of articles that are related to the various specialty areas of accounting. Further, the relative proportions of articles by area do not correspond to the numbers of individuals working in the specialty areas. Financial accounting articles appear in disproportionately high numbers for all journals except Accounting, Organizations and Society, whereas management accounting articles appear in disproportionately low numbers for all journals except Accounting, Organizations and Society. In all journals, systems and tax articles also appear to be disproportionately low vis-á-vis the numbers of individuals working in these areas. Auditing receives fairly even exposure across journals and vis-á-vis individuals in the area, except in the Journal of Accounting and Economics.

Prather-Kinsey, J.J. & Rueschhoff,H.G. (2004) "An Analysis of International Accounting Research in U.S.- and Non-U.S.-Based Academic Accounting Journals." Journal of International Accounting Research , 2004, Vol. 3 Issue 1, p 63-81, 19p
Faculty and administrators are called upon to evaluate international accounting researchers' performance, which requires knowledge of international accounting research journal outlets, journal rankings, topics, methods, and authorship. Both seasoned and novice international researchers are faced with the need to know the placement, turnaround review time, rankings, topics, methods, and authorship of potential international accounting research outlets. Thus, the objective of this study is to provide timely information to the international accounting research evaluator as well as to international accounting researchers, whether at the entrance, mid-career, or senior level. We compare and analyze accounting research published in 41 U.S.- and non-U.S.-based academic journals from 1981-2000 in order to describe and discern the trends of international accounting research within five dimensions: quantity, internationality, topic, method, and author. Our regression-based growth comparisons reveal an increase in international accounting research, a greater broadness/diversity in internationality topic and authorship across countries, and more broadness in research method over time from 1981 to 2000. Interestingly, one top-tier journal shows a decline in international accounting studies published. These findings are among those reported in our analyses that provide timely information to those pursuing or evaluating international accounting research.

Brown, Lawrence D. "Ranking Journals Using Social Science Research Network Downloads," Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting, Vol.20, No.3, May, 2003, p.291-307. (Available on ScholarsPortal)
"I use a new approach to rank journals, namely the number and percent frequency of articles a journal publishes that are heavily downloaded from the Social Science Research Network (SSRN). I rank 18 accounting and finance journals, and I identify five journals not considered by the two most recent major published ranking studies of publications by accounting faculty, namely (in rank order): Journal of Financial Economics, Review of Accounting Studies, and AccReview of Quantitative Finance and Accounting, Journal of Corporate Finance, and Journal of International Financial Management and Accounting. I show that financial accounting faculties are more likely to post their working papers to SSRN, and papers posted by financial faculties generate more downloads. I mitigate this bias in favor of the financial area by providing separate rankings based on authors in the financial versus non-financial areas."

Krogstad, J. and Smith, G. "Assessing the Influence of Auditing: A Journal of Practice and Theory 1985-1999", Auditing: A Journal of Practice and Theory, (2003).
"This study utilizes citation analysis to explore the impact and standing of Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory (AJPT) both within the accounting/auditing discipline and in the context of related fields. More specifically, the citations to AJPT from other journals included in the Social Sciences Citation Index (SSCI), plus citations appearing in additional, high-quality accounting/auditing journals (not included in the SSCI) are combined with self-citations to yield a database of 3,102 citations for the period 1985 through 2000. This database is analyzed to observe trends and to identify journals citing AJPT most frequently. Additionally, articles and authors cited most widely are enumerated. AJPTs growing influence and stature are documented, and the results support the conclusion that the Auditing Section's journal has continued to adhere to its essential objective of promoting communication between auditing research and practice."

Mathieu, Robert and McConomy, Bruce "Productivity in 'top-ten' Academic Accounting Journals by Researchers at Canadian Universities", Canadian Accounting Perspectives, 2:1 (2003): 43-77.
"The research productivity of academic accountants at Canadian universities for the 11-year period 1990-2000 is examined. The analysis is based on the "top-ten" ranked refereed journals in accounting, auditing, and taxation, as documented by Brown and Huefner (1994). An overview of the importance of publishing in highly ranked accounting journals for individual academics, departments, and business faculties. Details are then provided of the proportion of articles published in each of these journals by academics from Canadian universities; the type of research published in each journal; and details of editorial board service. Results indicate that even at the most productive Canadian university, faculty members publish approximately one article every 7 years. Six Canadian universities have faculty members with, on average, more than one article in "top-ten" journals every 10 years."

Lowe, A. and Locke, J. "Problematising and Construction of Journal Quality: An Engagement with the Mainstream", Accounting Forum, 26:1 (2002): 45-71.(Ask for assistance)

Milne, Markus J. (2001). Debating accounting research journal rankings : empirical issues from a citation based analysis and theoretical dilemmas from Economics. University of Otago, Department of Accountancy and Business Law.
This paper reports the results of a citation-based analysis of accounting research journals. From a
database developed from the citations to 27 accounting research journals within those same 27
research journals over the ten-year period 1990-1999, this paper reports the relative use (in terms of
citation) of the 27 journals. From both the entire citation set, and also from subsets drawn by the
geographical base of the journal (e.g. Non-US, US), the geographical base of the authors (e.g. US,
Non-US), and whether the journals appear in the Social Science Citation Index (SSCI), various
measures of journal impact are developed. These relative impact measures are then used to examine
journal rankings derived from peer-based surveys conducted in the UK (Brinn et al., 1996) and the
US (Hull & Wright, 1990; Brown and Huefner, 1994). This study also draws on Arrow's (1951)
work on social preference functions to question the theoretical validity of journal ranking studies.
The findings from this study suggest that other than for a very few journals, accounting journals
receive largely indifferent use, and, individually, appear to have very little general relevance to
accounting academics as a whole. Also reported is the diversity of citation behaviour, both between
US-based authors and non-US based authors, and across different journals. Such diversity, when
combined with Arrow's work, seems to throw into serious doubt the theoretical validity of some
attempts to generate universal journal rankings even within a single country.


Brinn, Tony, Michael Jones, Maurice Pendlebury."Why do UK Accounting and Finance Academics not Publish in Top US Journals? The British Accounting Review. London: Jun 2001. Vol. 33, Iss. 2; pg. 223 (Available on ScholarsPortal)
"In peer reviews of the quality of academic accounting and finance journals, US journals are consistently perceived to be the most prestigious. UK accounting and finance academics share these perceptions, and yet very few of them ever publish in top US journals. A survey of UK accounting and finance academics was undertaken in an attempt to ascertain why this is so. The respondents perceive that the preference of top US journals for a US focus to published articles, reinforced by a strong element of gatekeeping and the need to be able to network with the US academic community, provide major barriers to entry. As a result, there is a strong belief that efforts to publish in top US journals will be unsuccessful and, therefore, publishing in the UK is seen to be easier."

Martson, C. and A. Ayub (2000), ''Research Note: Relationship Between Publications in Selected Journals and Research Assessment Exercise Rankings in 1996 for UK Accountancy Departments'', Accounting Education , Vol. 9 , No. 1, pp. 93- 102.

Brinn, Tony, Jones, Michael John, Pendlebury, Maurice. "UK Academic Accountants' Perceptions of Research and Publication Practices," The British Accounting Review. London: Dec 1998. Vol. 30, Iss. 4; pg. 313 (Available on ScholarsPortal)
"Published research output is widely used as a measure of performance in UK universities. The acceptability is investigated of the research practices which underpin publication in accounting journals. Eighty-eight UK accounting academics reported their perceptions of the acceptability of 10 research practices and their views of 5 research publication statements. Three research practices were found to be particularly unacceptable, but were perceived to be frequently used. Nine guidelines are listed which have implications for auditors, editors and reviewers."

Smith, Kenneth J, Dombrowski, Robert F. "An Examination of the Relationship Between Author-Editor Connections and Subsequent Citations of Auditing Research Articles," Journal of Accounting Education, Summer/Fall 1998. Vol. 16, Iss. 3,4; pg. 497
"Using citation analysis of 138 auditing papers in 7 leading accounting research journals, evidence is found that papers for which there is an author-editor connection are more likely to be cited in subsequent research. It is more likely that papers published by authors who have served on the editorial board of the publishing journal will be cited more often, and it is less likely that papers written by authors with that type of connection will have no citations. Citation analysis was used to examine whether auditing research articles published by authors with professional connections to editors of the publishing journal are of lower quality than articles by authors without these editor connections."

Lee, Tom. "The Editorial Gatekeepers of the Accounting Academy," Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, Vol.10, No.1, p.11, 1997.
"This article proposes to evidence the colonization of the accounting knowledge production process by a relatively few elite institutions in the US. By examining the doctoral origins of the editorial board members of 6 major accounting research journals between 1963 and 1994, it demonstrates the extent of the colonization and its potential to bring closure to the knowledge production process. As such, the results are consistent with previous studies by Lee (1995) and Williams and Rodgers (1995), and improves the understanding of the history of the professionalization of accounting research."

Brinn, T., Jones, M, Pendlebury, M. "UK Accountants' Perceptions of Research Journal Quality", The Accounting Review, 26:3 (1996): 265-278. (Available in paper at the Business Library).
"The process of research quality assessment is now firmly established in UK universities. The quality of the journals in which academic papers are published is an important input to the assessment process. The relative quality of these journals is clearly difficult to establish in an objective manner. A paper contributes to the debate about relative quality by conducting a peer review. Some 88 UK accounting academics reported their degree of familiarity with, and perceptions of quality of, a total of 44 journals in the accounting and finance discipline. Accounting and Business Research and the British Accounting Review were the 2 most familiar academic journals. The most highly ranked journals were generally from the US."

Zeff, Stephen. A. "A Study of Academic Research Journals in Accounting", Accounting Horizons, 10:3 (Sept. 1996):158-177.
"A study reports on a census of the academic research journals in accounting, provides a review of recent trends in journal formation, presents a study of library subscription profiles to the journals included in the census and examines the degree to which the census journals are indexed in print and electronic databases. An attempt to forecast the continued evolution of academic research journals in accounting in the electronic age is made."

Hasselback, James R, Reinstein, Alan. "A Proposal for Measuring Scholarly Productivity of Accounting Faculty,"
Issues in Accounting Education, Fall 1995. Vol. 10, Iss. 2; pg. 269
"While many studies have analyzed the quantity of articles that accounting faculty publish or the quality of journals where such faculty publish, no one has yet combined both methodologies. After extensively reviewing the related literature, both the quality and quantity are assessed of the publication records of accounting faculty members at over 700 institutions nationwide using 40 journals. Faculty members, students, administrators, and alumni can use these results as a measure of the research records of these institutions."

Jolly, S.A., Schroeder, R.G., Spear, R.K. "An Empirical Investigation of the Relationship Between Journal Quality Ratings and Promotion and Tenure Decisions", Accounting Educators' Journal, 7:2 (1995): 47-68. (Ask for assistance)

Brown, L.D. and Huefner, R.J., "The Familiarity with and Perceived Quality of Accounting Journals: Views of Senior Accounting Faculty in Leading U.S. MBA Programs", Contemporary Accounting Research, 11:1 (Summer 1994): 223-250. (Available in paper at the Business Library).
"Determining familiarity with and evaluating quality of accounting journals are of interest to various parties in accounting academia. In recent years, the number of accounting journals has grown, and many special-interest subgroups have arisen. A study surveys senior faculty at Business Week's "best 40 MBA programs" to determine their familiarity with and quality perceptions of 44 accounting journals. As to familiarity, 5 journals were nearly universally known, and a total of 15 had wide recognition. Financial, managerial, and auditing faculty exhibited similar familiarity patterns, while tax faculty had a somewhat different pattern. As to quality perceptions, relatively few journals achieved high quality evaluations. There was, however, general consensus across the different subject area faculty as to the top journals. Special consideration was given to the new (post-1980) journals. Six of the 19 newer journals in the study achieved high familiarity scores, and 3 achieved high quality evaluations."

Smith, L.M. "Relative Contribution of Professional Journals to the Field of Accounting", Accounting Educators' Journal, (Spring): 1994, 1-31.

Chung, Kee H., Pak, Hong S., Cox, Raymond A. K., "Patterns of Research Output in the Accounting Literature,"
Abacus. Sep 1992. Vol. 28, Iss. 2; pg. 168. (Available in paper at the Business Library).
"Numerous studies have evaluated the contribution of institutions and individuals to the accounting literature. However, none of those studies examined whether a pattern of productivity in the accounting literature conforms to an empirical regularity, such as Lotka's Law, which has been observed in the literature of other academic disciplines. The empirical results of studying accounting literature reveals that a strong bibliometric regularity exists. The graduates of 7 graduate programs are found to account for more than 1/3 of the most prolific authors, indicating a strong institutional dominance in the production of accounting literature. Since the study made no attempt to assess the quality or length of articles or their contribution to the accounting literature, the rankings presented should be interpreted with some caution."

Chandy, P.R., Ganesh, G.K., Henderson, G.V., "Awareness and Evaluation of Selected Accounting Journals Inside and Outside the Discipline: An Empirical Study", Akron Business and Economic Review, 22:2 (Summer 1991): 214-226.
(Available in the Business Library)
"An attempt is made to identify the impressions of researchers inside and outside the accounting discipline about various accounting journals. Given the responses of 474 researchers who had published in "top" journals in their fields, 2 broad conclusions seem to be warranted: 1. Awareness of accounting journals is significantly higher within the discipline than outside it. 2. Accounting journals are evaluated more favorably by accounting researchers than by those outside the area. These conclusions stand up in further examination of subsamples consisting of only: 1. tenured researchers, and 2. tenured researchers who serve on promotion and tenure committees. The responses indicate that research is the key to success in the academic world of colleges of business, leading by more than 2-1 over teaching and service components. If research is that important, it is essential that committee evaluation of a faculty member's research efforts be fair and objective."

Hall, T.W. and Ros, W.R. "Contextual Effect in Measuring Accounting Faculty Perceptions of Accounting Journals: An Empirical Test and Updated Journal Rankings", Advances in Accounting, (1991): 161-182.
No abstract available.

Hull, R.P. and Wright, G.B., "Faculty Perceptions of Journal Quality: An Update," Accounting Horizons, 4:1 (March 1990): 77-98.
"Howard and Nikolai (1983) surveyed 528 accounting educators with earned doctorates and asked the subjects to rank 51 accounting and business journals. Magnitude-estimation procedures were used to calculate a geometric mean of the 311 usable responses; this was employed to develop a ratio-scale quality ranking of the journals. Their study was replicated and updated using the survey responses of 278 faculty members with earned doctorates or master of law (LLM) degrees. A total of 29 journals were added to the journal list. The top 4 and bottom 4 journals are the same in both studies, and there is great similarity in the middle of the 2 rankings. The criteria used by respondents to rank the journals included prestige, refereed versus nonrefereed, research versus practice orientation, and national audience. A comparison of rankings by faculty from doctoral institutions and faculty from institutions not having a doctoral program shows that faculty at doctoral-granting institutions assign more quality to theoretical-empirical journals than do faculty in non-doctoral-granting institutions. Assistant professors perceived the quality of the journals in the top 15 ranking to be higher than full professors perceived them to be."

Morris, J.L., Cudd, R.M., Crain, J.L. "The Potential Bias in Accounting Journal Ratings: Evidence Concerning Journal-Specific Bias", The Accounting Educators Journal, 3:1 (1990): 46-55.

Bricker, Robert, "An Empirical Investigation of the Structure of Accounting Research", Journal of Accounting Research, 27:2 (Autumn 1989): 246-262.
"The accounting discipline is sciencelike in its efforts to explain and predict phenomena, so its research may be most efficient when the individual research areas are integrated. A study was undertaken to empirically infer the disciplinary structure of accounting research and then to determine whether the inferred structure was fragmented or integrated. Data for the study consisted of the main articles and bibliographies from 6 accounting journals from approximately January 1983 through March 1986. Cocitation clustering and content analysis were used to infer the structure, which was validated using multiple discriminant analysis and an independent data source. The results provide partial support for assertions that accounting research is fragmented, in that the associations among some broad research areas are very limited and, at the disciplinary level, several separate, isolated research areas exist."

Schroeder, R.G., Payne, D.D., and Harris, D.G., "Perceptions of Accounting Publications Outlets: A Futher Analysis" The Accounting Educators Journal, (Fall 1988): 1-17.

Smith, G. and Krogstad, J.L. "A Taxonomy of Content and Citations in Auditing: A Journal of Practice and Theory", Auditing: A Journal of Practice and Theory, 8:2 (1988): 108-117.

Cargile, B.R., and Bublitz, B. "Factors Contributing to Published Research by Accounting Faculties", The Accounting Review, 61:1: (1986): 158-178.
"Little empirical research has been done concerning the factors most conducive to research and publication activity by academic accountants. To determine these factors, a questionnaire was mailed in late spring and early summer 1983 to a sample of 840 accounting faculty members listed in the 1983 Prentice-Hall Accounting Faculty Directory. The 208 usable responses received are analyzed in terms of doctoral-granting programs, divided into 2 groups, and nondoctoral-granting programs. Results indicate that important research facilitators, as perceived by the respondents overall, were: 1. access to the computer, 2. two time-related items (reduced teaching loads and committee assignments), and 3. two people-related items (abilities or quality of fellow faculty members and graduate students). The respondents' perceptions of employer provision and support of these facilitators generally were more favorable for people-related factors, less favorable for access to the computer, and least favorable for time-related factors."

Brown, L.D. and Gardner, J.C. "Using Citation Analysis to Assess the Impact of Journals and Articles on Contemporary Accounting Research", Journal of Accounting Research, 23:1 (1985): 84-109.
"Citation analysis is used to assess the overall effect of major research journals on contemporary accounting research (CAR) and to identify those specific papers exerting the greatest impact on CAR. The database consists of references to all journal papers written by accountants that were cited by one or more major journal articles published during the years 1976-1982 in The Accounting Review (AC), Journal of Accounting Research (JAR), Accounting Organizations and Society (AOS), and/or Journal of Accounting and Economics (JAE). A total of 545 major articles were published in the 4 journals during the study period, and they made 4,566 references to 1,357 major cited articles. Analysis reveals that many articles are never cited. Some 75% of the cited articles written by accountants in the 85+ referred journals were published in the 4 citing journals. Furthermore, CAR has been affected more by JAR than by either AR or AOS, but with regard to papers published during the JAE publication period (1979-1982), JAE has been the most influential journal. Several articles have exerted a substantial influence on CAR."

Brown, Lawrence D., Gardner, John C."Applying Citation Analysis to Evaluate the Research Contributions of Accounting Faculty and Doctoral Programs," The Accounting Review. Apr 1985. Vol. 60, Iss. 2; pg. 262.
"Citation analysis is used to evaluate the research contributions of accounting faculties, doctoral programs, and individuals to contemporary accounting research (CAR). A research contribution is measured as CAR citations to a journal article written by an accountant, and CAR is defined as all major articles published in The Accounting Review, Journal of Accounting Research, Journal of Accounting and Economics, and Accounting, Organizations and Society during the period 1976-1982. The data consist of 4,948 citations to 1,574 articles authored or coauthored by 712 accounting researchers. The advantages and disadvantages of citation analysis are discussed, and the sensitivity of the results to other citation measurement metrics is explored. The procedure used here can be used cautiously to evaluate contributions of research contemporaries in specific disciplines."

Nobes, Christopher W. 1985. "International Variations in Perceptions of Accounting Journals. Accounting Review 60 (4): 702-5.
"The study on perceptions of quality of accounting journals by Howard and Nikolai [1983] is extended to include respondents from the U.K., Australia, and New Zealand. There are highly significant correlations between the perceptions of faculty in these three countries. There is also a high correlation with the earlier U.S. study, though the ranking of a few journals is markedly different."

Dyckman, R.E. and Zeff, S.A. "Two Decades of the Journal of Accounting Research", Journal of Accounting Research, 22:1 (1984): 225-297.
"The Journal of Accounting Research (JAR) began in 1963 out of a need to attune the accounting literature to developments in the theory and methods of research in other disciplines. Discussion centers on assessing the contribution of JAR during its first 20 years (1963-1982). Attention is focused on empirically measuring JAR's effect on the accounting literature and the nature of this effect. A number of measures are reported: 1. circulation, 2. journal ratings, 3. publications, 4. effect on professional deliberations, 6. academic interest, and 6. citations. The evidence shows that JAR and its Supplements have hastened the integration into the accounting literature of ideas and methods from other disciplines. Furthermore, JAR has played a premier role in establishing a tradition of empirical research in accounting, especially in capital markets and behavioral work. Above all, JAR has been distinguished for its propensity to experiment with new research methodologies."

Howard, Thomas P., Nikolai, Loren A. "Attitude Measurement and Perceptions of Accounting Faculty Publication Outlets,"
The Accounting Review, Oct 1983. Vol. 58, Iss. 4; pg. 765. (Ask for assistance)
Magnitude estimation procedures are used to estimate a ranking of the perceived quality of accounting and accounting-related journals. A sample of 528 accounting faculty in the US was surveyed to determine perceptions of accounting publications. The 311 respondents listed TheJournal of Accounting Research and The Accounting Review as the best among 51 journals. Comparisons of results by area of specialization indicate that significant differences in the rankings of journals can be attributed to area of specialization. Additional results are presented regarding differences in selection between assistant and full professors, and by level of the highest degree granted by the institution. A major limitation of the study is that no data were gathered regarding what journals respondents subscribe to, read, or publish in. The research is compared to a previous study by Benjamin and Brenner (1974).
(Available on JSTOR and in paper)



Carraher, Shawn M ,  Terrence J Paridon. "Entrepreneurship Journal Rankings Across the Discipline" Journal of Small Business Strategy.  Fall 2008/Winter 2009.  Vol. 19,  Iss. 2,  p. 89-98 (10 pp.)

In this paper we report on the results of a survey of 230 members of the Small Business Institute® and the U.S. Association for Small Business and Entrepreneurship on journal rankings. The top four entrepreneurship journals were Entrepreneurship: Theory & Practice, the Journal of Business Venturing, the Journal of Small Business Strategy, and the Journal of Small Business Management. Suggestions for improving the status of specialized entrepreneurship journals are provided.

Fried, Vance H. "Defining a Forum for Entrepreneurship Scholars", Journal of Business Venturing, Jan 2003. Vol. 18,
Iss.1; pg. 1. (Available on ScholarsPortal)
"This study defines a forum for entrepreneurship scholars by updating [MacMillan, I.C., 1993. The emerging forum for entrepreneurship scholars. J. Bus. Venturing [see below]. A 3-stage process is used in which entrepreneurship scholars identify and subjectively rate journals as publication outlets for entrepreneurship research. Twenty-five journals were rated "appropriate" or higher, including both generalist and entrepreneurship specialist journals, both academic and practitioner journals, and journals from multiple academic disciplines. Compared to the 10-year earlier survey, there is a strong increase in the ratings of specialist journals."

Aldrich, H.E., & Baker, T. (1997). "Blinded by the Cites? Has there been progress in Entrepreneurship Research?" In D.L. Sexton & R.W. Smilor (eds.) Entrepreneurship 2000.

Shane, S. "Who is Publishing the Entrepreneurship Research" Journal of Management,23:1 (1997): 83-95. (Available in paper at the Business Library and on ScholarsPortal).
"A study examines the impact of individuals and institutions on research in entrepreneurship for the period since the Academy of Management accorded division status to entrepreneurship in 1987. It includes research in publications rated appropriate quality or above as entrepreneurship research outlets by MacMillan's (1993) survey. Nineteen different publications, containing 472 entrepreneurship articles were reviewed. Rankings adjusted and unadjusted for journal quality are presented.

Romano, C., & Ratnatunga, J. "A Citation Analysis of the Impact of Journals on Contemporary Small Enterprise Research," Entrepreneurship: Theory and Practice, Vol.20, No.3, 1996, p.3. (Available in paper at the Business Library).
"A study explores the impact of small enterprise journals and articles on contemporary small enterprise research (CSER) through the examination of a sample of 725 articles and approximately 16,720 of their citations. One of the conclusions of the study is that the source journal articles as a group initially had a minimal impact on contemporary small enterprise research, although there is evidence of an increasing level of impact in the more recent years."
See also another version of this article: "A "Citation Classics" Analysis of Articles in Contemporary Small Enterprise Research",
by Ratnatunga, Janek, Romano, Claudio, in the Journal of Business Venturing, May 1997. Vol. 12, Iss. 3; p. 197

Macmillan, Ian C. "The Emerging Forum for Entrepreneurship Scholars," Journal of Business Venturing, Sep 1993. Vol. 8, Iss. 5; pg. 377.
"A follow-up to 2 earlier studies, published in 1989 and 1991, is presented. A sample of tenured entrepreneurship scholars, with significant publication records, rated key management journals with respect to their appropriateness as outlets for scholarly research in the entrepreneurship field. It was made clear to the respondents that no attempt was made to separate "academic" from "practitioner" or "general" from "specialist" journals, allowing the respondent to decide the extent to which publication was indicative of scholarly competence in the field of entrepreneurship. The results show the positions of the various publications for the present 1992 survey, the 1990 survey, and the 1988 pilot. Whereas in the 1990 survey, 10 of 17 journals' scores dropped (though not significantly), the 1992 survey results show that 12 out of 16 journals rated increased their 1990 ratings. The top-rated journals appear to be Academy of Management Journal, Administrative Science Quarterly, Academy of Management Review, Strategic Management Journal, and Journal of Business Venturing.


Currie, Russell R; Pandher, Gurupdesh S. Finance Journal Rankings and Tiers: An Active Scholar Assessment Methodology  Journal of Banking & Finance 35. 1  (Jan 2011): 7.

This study uses respondent data from a Web-based survey of active finance scholars (45% response rate from 37 countries) to endogenously rank 83 finance journals by quality and importance. Journals are further tiered into four groups (A, B, C and D) and stratified into "upper", "middle" and "lower" tier categories (e.g. A+, A and A-) by estimating a nested regression with random journal-within-tier effects. The comprehensive and endogenous ranking of finance journals based on the Active Scholar Assessment (ASA) methodology can help authors evaluate the strategic aspects of placing their research, facilitate assessment of research achievement by tenure and promotion committees; and assist university libraries in better managing their journal resources. Study findings from active researchers in the field also provide useful guidance to editorial boards for enhancing their journal standing. 

Hardin III, William G ,  Kartono Liano,  Kam C Chan,  Robert C W Fok. "Finance editorial board membership and research productivity" Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting. Oct 2008.  Vol. 31,  Iss. 3,  p. 225-240 (16 pp.)

The research productivity of board members of the top academic finance journals - Journal of Finance, Journal of Financial Economics, Review of Financial Studies, Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, and Financial Management - is investigated. Discipline specific benchmarks for substantial research excellence are determined and an evaluation of influential finance journals is presented. Publication in Journal of Finance is the most notable benchmark for selection to the editorial board of any of the finance journals evaluated. The results imply that publishing one article in Journal of Finance, Journal of Financial Economics or Review of Financial Studies in a 5-year period coupled with additional appearances in the broader top tier finance journals would be representative of exceptional research achievement.

 Beattie, Vivien & Alan Goodacre, (2006) " A New Method for Ranking Academic Journals in Accounting and Finance," Accounting and Business Research, Vol.36, No.2,, p.65.
Given the many and varied uses to which journal rankings are put, interest in ranking journal 'quality' is likely to persist. Unfortunately, existing methods of constructing such rankings all have inherent limitations. This paper proposes a now (complementary) approach, based on submission to RAE 2001, which is not restricted to a pre-defined journal set and, importantly, is based on quality choice decisions driven by economic incentives. For three metrics, submissions to RAE 2001 are compared with the available set of publications to provide evidence on the perception of journal quality, a fourth metric is based on the overall RAE grades, and an overall ranking is produced.

Oltheten, Elisabeth; Theoharakis, Vasilis; Travlos, Nickolaos. "Faculty Perceptions and Readership Patterns of Finance Journals: A Global View, " Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis. Mar. 2005, Vol.40 No.1, p.223
Journal rankings are frequently used as a measure of both journal and author research quality. Nonetheless, debates frequently arise because journal rankings do not take into account the underlying diversity of the finance research community. This study examines how factors such as a researcher's geographic origin, research interests, seniority, and journal affiliation influence journal quality perceptions and readership patterns. Based on a worldwide sample of 862 finance academics, we find remarkable consistency in the rankings of top journals. For the remaining journals, perception of journal quality differs depending on the researcher's geographic origin, research interests, seniority, and journal affiliation.

Chan, K.C. Fok, R.C.W. & Pan, M.S.(2000) " Citation-based finance journal rankings: An update" Financial Practice and Education , Spring/Summer
In this paper, we use citation data in 1997-1998 to provide an update on the ranking of 59 journals in financial research. Our results show that the top 10 journals are similar to those presented in previous studies. We also find that several new journals (e.g., Journal of Empirical Finance, Journal of Financial Intermediation, and Mathematical Finance) have gained good quality ratings. [JEL: G00]

Arnold, Tom, Butler, Alexander, Crack, T.F., Altintig, Ayca. "Impact: What Influences Finance Research?", The Journal of Business, 76:2 (Apr 2003): 343.
"Which journal articles have had the most impact on finance research? Which journals dominated finance research in the 1990s? We answer these and similar questions using a comprehensive sample of journals, an extensive time period, and a new ranking method that avoids problems inherent in the existing literature. Among our findings: six of the 10 articles most highly cited by finance journals were published in econometrics or economics journals; Journal of Finance has the most citations, but it accounts for only one of the top 10 articles; and Journal of Financial Economics has the highest impact per article."

Chan, Kam, et al, "Production in the Finance Literature, Institutional Reputation, and Labor Mobility in Academia: A Global Perspective," Financial Management, Vol. 31, No.4,Winter, 2002, p.131-156
"Academic institutions are ranked on a global scale in terms of finance literature productivity. US institutions are dominant in academic publishing although European and Asian institutions have improved significantly in recent years. Additionally, this article studies the relationship between the quality of human capital and the likelihood of an upward career move. Results show that an individual relocates to a higher-ranked institution exhibits a research record that is 2 times stronger than that of an average faculty member at the destination institution. It further models the probability of an upward move in the academic labor market as a function of human capital using an ordered logistic model. It finds that publications in 16 core journals, publications in 3 top journals, and the rank of the Ph.D. granting institution enhance the probability of moving to a higher ranked institution. On the other hand, the length of teaching experience decreases this probability."

Chung, K., Cox, R., Mitchell, J. "Citation Patterns in the Finance Literature", Financial Management, 30:3 (2001): 99-118.
"Out of a total of 12,637 individuals whose works were ever cited in the leading finance journals over the past 25 years, the top 1% (10%) account for more than one third (3/4) of the number of citations to articles published in these journals. In contrast, nearly one half of the authors have been cited only once. Similarly, the top 1% (10%) of articles/books received 22% (56%) of the total number of citations. These results indicate that afew prominent researchers dominate citation in the leading finance journals. More than half of the 100 most cited works were published in the Journal of Finance and Journal of Financial Economics."

Borde, S.J. Cheney and Madura, J. "A Note on Perceptions of Finance Journal Quality", Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting, 12:1 (1999): 89-96.
"Finance journal quality is a critical issue for faculty annual elevations, for the tenure and promotion process, and for the administration of faculty workload plans. Unlike other studies that use objective measures (such as citation frequencies) to rate journals, this study focuses on the opinions of chairpersons about the relative quality of 55 finance, insurance, and real estate journals. A sample of 218 finance department chairpersons at AACSB accredited business schools were surveyed, and 125 responses were received (57.34% response rate). Besides overall aggregate scores, responses are segregated and tested for differences across several dimensions. The results offer interesting and current insight on general perceptions of journal quality".

McNulty, James E. & John Boekeloo, "Two Approaches to Measuring Journal Quality: Application to Finance Journals," Journal of Economics and Finance. Vol.23, No.1, Spring, 1999, p. 30.
"The tendency of a journal to publish articles that eventually become classics in their specialized fields is analyzed. A simple theoretical model is developed and applied to citation data for finance journals in 1991 and 1992. Of the top ten finance journals, only four are traditional finance journals, and six are economics journals, while none are accounting journals. This illustrates the close synergies between economic research and financial research. In contrast, the linkages between accounting research and financial research are much weaker."

Swidler, S., Goldreyer, E. "The Value of a Finance Journal Publication", Journal of Finance, 53 (1998): 351-364.
"An empirical analysis examines the salary and publication records of 311 finance professors at public research universities to calculate the worth of a top finance journal article. Within rank, salary regressions provide measures of the direct returns of a journal publication, while probit models consider the indirect returns that result from promotion. Ultimately, the analysis uses a reduced-form salary equation to measure both the direct and indirect effects of publishing a top finance article. Depending on professorial rank, the present value of the first top finance journal article is between $19,493 and $33,754, with the additional result of large returns to subsequent publications.

Borokhovich, Kenneth A, Bricker, Robert J, Brunarski, Kelly R, Simkins, Betty J., "Finance Research Productivity and Influence," The Journal of Finance, Dec 1995, Vol. 50, Iss. 5; pg. 1691.
"A study examines differences in finance research productivity and influence across 661 academic institutions over the 5-year period 1989-1993. The results shows that 40 institutions account for over 50% of all articles published by 16 leading journals over the 5-year period; 66 institutions account for 2/3 of the articles. Influence is more skewed, with as few as 20 institutions accounting for 50% of all citations to articles in these journals. The number of publications and publication influence increase with faculty size and academic accreditation. Prestigious business schools are associated with a high publication productivity and influence. "

Alexander, J.C. and Mabry, R.H., "Relative Significance of Journals, Authors, and Articles Cited in Financial Research," The Journal of Finance, 49:2 (June 1994): 697-712.
"A study evaluates journals based on the relative contributions to top-level finance research in the period 1987-1991. Journals are ranked according to the number of citations found in articles published in Journal of Finance, Journal of Financial Economics, Journal of Financial and Quantatitive Analysis, and Review of Financial Studies. The analysis controls for both the average number of articles and
average number of words published annually in each cited journal. The study identifies the 50 most frequently cited journals during the period. It also lists the 50 most frequently cited authors and articles and notes topical trends in the research."

Borokhovich, Kenneth A., Bricker, Robert J., Simkins, Betty, "Journal Communication and Influence in Financial Research", Journal of Finance, 49:2 (June 1994): 713-725.
"A study uses the articles and citations from a set of 8 finance journals to explore interjournal citation patterns, the research interests of individual journals, each journal's influence in particular areas, areas of recent interest to finance, and the extent of interdisciplinary borrowing by finance. The study found the following: 1. Two journals comprise the research core of financial research - Journal of Finance and Journal of Financial Economics. 2. Most journals publish in a variety of research areas, but are influential in a smaller number. 3. There is a higher level of interest in financial markets than in corporate finance or financial institutions. 4. There is an overall low level of borrowing from outside disciplines."

Cudd, Mike, Morris, Joe. "Bias In Journal Ratings," The Financial Review, Feb 1988. Vol. 23, Iss. 1; pg. 117.
"The association between faculty publication records and their point-based evaluations of finance journals is investigated. No relationship is found between the merit points given to finance journals and the journal-specific success of the faculty rendering the journal ratings. However, a negative relationship is found between general publication success of faculty and the merit points they assign to lower-level journal publications. The association is found to be especially strong for faculty who have published in the top 3 finance publications. Given the number of studies that have tried to rank the finance journals and the increased emphasis on point-based merit systems, awareness of the potential bias detected is relevant to the process of evaluating faculty performance.

Niemi, A.W. Jr. (1987), "Institutional Contributions to the Leading Finance Journals, 1975 Through 1986: A Note", Journal of Finance, Vol. XLII, No. 5 (December), pp. 1389- 97.

Coe, Robert K., Weinstock, Irwin. "Evaluating the Finance Journals: The Department Chairperson's Perspective,"
The Journal of Financial Research, Winter 1983. Vol. 6, Iss. 4; pg. 345.
In a recent study, finance department chairpersons report that the role of publications in appointment and promotion decisions has become more important over the past 10 years. A survey study undertaken in 1967 investigated how finance department chairpersons rate the various financial and related journals in terms of the reflected achievement of a finance professor. A 1982 study used a similar questionnaire, providing a 15-year perspective in evaluating finance journals. Usable responses were received from 107 business schools. The hypothesis that finance department chairpersons would typically relate high achievement for journal authorship to journals that have low acceptance rates and vice versa is strongly confirmed with a highly significant plus .85 coefficient of rank correlation. This same relationship existed in 1967. Finance chairpersons tend to overestimate the acceptance rates of journals in both surveys by about 40%."



 Martin, Jeanette St Clair; Davis, Barbara D; Krapels, Roberta H. 
“A Comparison Of the Top Six Journals  Selected as Top Journals for Publication by  Business Communication  Educators,” The Journal of Business Communication 49. 1  (Jan 2012): 3. 
This study compares the top six journals selected in an earlier survey of Association for Business Communication members as the top journals in which to publish for professional advancement. Those journals include Academy of Management Journal, Academy of Management Review, Administrative Science Quarterly, Journal of Business and Technical Communication, Journal of Business Communication, and Management Communication Quarterly. Using variables found in other disciplines' journal assessment articles, comparisons were made with the following: length of articles published, disciplines of authors, statistical methodology included, major discipline of article focus, number of references included, and research methods used with sample size where appropriate. The analysis indicated significant differences among many of these journals. In selecting where to publish BMOC (business, management, organizational communication) articles, prospective authors in the area will find the information on these six journals informative and beneficial.

Hussain, Simon.
“Food for Thought on the ABS Academic Journal Quality Guide”
Accounting Education 20. 6 (2011): 545.
This paper discusses issues relating to the use of the Association of Business Schools' (ABS) Academic Journal Quality Guide within UK business schools. It also looks at several specific issues raised by the Chair of the British Accounting Association/British Accounting and Finance Association regarding the ratings for top international journals, and for accounting education and accounting history journals. The increasing use of this guide by business school deans/heads as a tool for staffing and research resource allocation has significant implications both for individuals and specialist areas of research

Moosa, Imad.
“The Demise of the ARC Journal Ranking Scheme: An ex post Analysis of the Accounting and Finance Journals,” Accounting and Finance 51. 3  (Sep 2011): 809.
The recent abolition of the ARC journal ranking scheme is indicative of some problematical features of journal ranking in general and the ARC scheme in particular. An alternative citation-based ranking scheme is applied to the accounting and finance journals to highlight some loopholes in the abandoned ARC scheme and provide some suggestions for how to proceed with ERA 2012. By re-ranking journals according to their citation indices, it is demonstrated that the ARC ranking placed a large number of journals where they do not belong. As a result, the ARC scheme induced some adverse behavioural changes with respect to preferred publication outlets.

Shilbury, David. 
“A Bibliometric Study of Citations to Sport Management and Marketing Journals,”Journal of Sport Management 25. 5  (Sep 2011): 423.
The purpose of this study was to examine the influence of seven sport management and marketing journals on sport-related research published in 20 top tier generic management and marketing journals. Ten top tier management and 10 top tier marketing journals were inventoried to ascertain the number of sport-related management and marketing manuscripts published in those journals from 1987 to 2007. Twenty-five sport management and 51 sport marketing-related manuscripts were identified in the generic journals. From these manuscripts, twelve citations to the seven sport journals were identified in the management publications and 98 citations to the seven sport journals were found in the marketing publications. Sport Marketing Quarterly (62) was the most cited sport management and marketing journal followed by the Journal of Sport Management (28). Results also identify citation frequency by year, first citations and time taken for the seven sport journals to record first citations, author citation frequency and field of author affiliation and its impact on citation patterns. Implications for sport journal focus and editorial policies are discussed as well as the impact of citations in the generic marketing journals compared with the generic management journals.

Linton, Jonathan.
“How influential are Technology Innovation Management journals-Technology Innovation Management Journal 2010 Impact Factors in comparison with Financial Times 45,” Technovation  31. 9  (Sep 2011): 425.
As Journal Citation Reports (ISI Web of Science) have just released their 2010 Impact Factors it is a good time to update how Technology Innovation Management specialty journals stack up in relation to the highly respected Financial Times (FT) 45 journals. If a group of Technology Innovation Management specialty journals is compared, as well as two recently indexed journals: Journal of Technology Transfer and Industry and Innovation, to the Financial Times 45, there are 7 Technology Innovation Management Journals sit above FT45 journals in impact. While the four highest impact journals sit clearly within the FT45 list if ranked on impact, and the lack of Technology Innovation Management Journals in this list appears to be an unfortunate oversight. While researchers in the field are aware of the value of technology innovation management research, a reminder from time-to-time is useful for local academic administrators, tenure and promotion committees and others.

Macdonald, Stuart; Kam, Jacqueline.
“The skewed few: people and papers of quality in management studies: The Interdisciplinary Journal of Organization, Theory and Society,” Organization 18. 4 (Jul 2011): 467.
Publication in the top journals of management studies is highly skewed. Very few authors publish in these top journals. They are said to be the best few, on the assumption that skew indicates quality. Yet, skew is natural in any distribution and would occur in the absence of all quality. Peer review is supposed to ensure that this cannot happen, but pressure to publish in top journals puts demands on the peer review system it was never intended to bear. One result is that the skewed few tend to be the same few. We look at how this is arranged. We investigate the citation of the skewed few. We find much self citation, mutual citation and group citation. This behaviour is encouraged by the paramount importance of the journal impact factor. The article looks at how this indicator has been contrived for commercial rather than academic reasons, and considers some of the consequences.

Jeung, Chang-Wook; Yoon, Hea Jun; Park, Sunyoung; Jo, Sung Jun.
“The Contributions of Human Resource Development Research across Disciplines: A Citation and Content Analysis,”  Human Resource Development Quarterly 22. 1  (Apr 2011): 87-109.
The primary purpose of the current study is to identify how human resource development (HRD) research has contributed to the knowledge base across social science disciplines during the past two decades. We identified the top 20 Academy of Human Resource Development (AHRD) journal articles that have been most frequently cited in research articles published in journals other than the four AHRD journals. With the use of content analysis of the most-cited articles, three key research themes were identified: (a) training transfer and evaluation, (b) learning in organizations, and (c) knowledge sharing and knowledge creation. The research contributions of HRD within the field of HRD and across disciplines are discussed.

 Albers, Sönke.
" Misleading Rankings of Research in Business " German Economic Review. Aug 2009. Vol. 10, Iss. 3, p. 352-363

The attempts by Schulze and colleagues and Ritzberger to develop a joint ranking of journals for economics and business research are critically evaluated. Their lists suggest that the quality of top business journals is substantially lower than that of many economics journals. If, however, the authors of these lists do not want to claim a general superiority of one discipline (economics) over another one (business), they should give a clear indication that these lists are only applicable for economists. This warning appears to be necessary because Fabel and colleagues derive a ranking of universities and departments with respect to research productivity in business from the business research discriminating list RbR_IMP by Schulze and colleagues. While Diamantopoulos and Wagner already show a lack of face validity of these results, this article explains that the reason for this lies not only in the downgrading and also biased weighting of the business journals across subfields, but even more importantly, in a remarkable incompleteness of the database.

Runyan, Rodney C. "Defining a forum for retailing scholars: academics' rankings of journals in the discipline " The International Review of Retail, Distribution and Consumer Research. Sep 2008.  Vol. 18,  Iss. 4,  p. 437

The publication and dissemination of scholarly work are the major functions of journals. Thus rankings of journal effectiveness exist for many business disciplines. To date, such a ranking has not been conducted for the retail discipline. Utilizing a previously operationalized methodology, a four-stage, systematic rating of journals as outlets for retailing research was undertaken. Following MacMillan, it is posited that scholars in a field are best suited to define scholarly work and outlets in that field. Journals found to be 'outstanding' outlets were the Journal of Retailing and the Journal of Marketing. Seven other journals were rated as 'significant' while the remaining five were seen as 'acceptable'. A discussion of the use and importance of the findings follows the results section. The current study adds to the literature, as it utilizes recognized experts in the field to define what is a proper scholarly forum for retailing research.

McIntyre, Faye S.   James E McIntyre,  Mary Kay Rickard. "A Study of Business Education Research Outlets" Academy of Educational Leadership Journal. 2008.  Vol. 12,  Iss. 2,  p. 69-85 (17 pp.)

Business school faculty are seeking to respond to a renewed emphasis on the scholarship of teaching and must find publication outlets for their work. Though a number of studies have assessed the source and content of education-oriented journal publications in specific business disciplines, no cross-disciplinary assessment of business education publishing opportunities exists. This paper presents the findings of an analysis of historical and current education-related publishing opportunities for business school faculty. Initial findings indicate that the number of publication outlets has increased, but remains a small percentage of business outlets. Overall circulation of education-related business journals has increased, though a larger percent of current journals have relatively small circulations. Recent trends identified in the analysis include the introduction of journals that are distributed exclusively on-line and the increasing dominance of blind, rather than editorial, reviewed journals. Findings indicate both an increase in interest in the scholarship of teaching and an increase in competition among contributors.

Bernardi, Richard A. et al.

"Fostering Ethics Research: An Analysis of the Accounting, Finance and Marketing Disciplines," Journal of Business Ethics. Sep 2008. Vol. 82, Iss. 1, p. 157-170 (14 pp.)

This study compares the level of ethics research published in 25 business-ethics journals and the Top-40 journals for the accounting, finance, and marketing disciplines. This research documents an increasing level of ethics research in the accounting and marketing disciplines starting in 1992. While the level of finance doctorates reported by the Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of Business (AACSB) has increased at a higher rate (40.4%) than accounting (18.4%) and marketing (32.2%) since 1995, this increase has not been reflected in the level of ethics scholarship in finance. The level of ethics scholarship in finance remained relatively constant between 1987 and 2005 at an average of seven coauthor-adjusted articles per year. However, both the accounting and marketing disciplines now regularly publish approximately 50 coauthor-adjusted articles each year.

Harzing, Anne-Wi. "Arbitrary Decisions in Ranking Studies: A Commentary on Xu, Yalcinkaya, and Seggie" Asia Pacific Journal of Management. Dec 2008. Vol. 25, Iss. 4, p. 685-689 (5 pp.)

Xu, Shichun, et al. "Are Decisions "Arbitrary" in our International Business Ranking Study? A Response to Harzing, Asia Pacific Journal of Management.Dec 2008. Vol. 25, Iss. 4, p. 691-695 (5 pp.)

No abstract available.

Peng, Mike W. & Zhou, Jessie Qi" Most Cited Articles and Authors in Global Strategy Research" , Journal of International Management, Vol.12, No.4, Dec. 2006, pp.490-508.
"Recent reviews of global strategy research have documented a number of top contributors based on the number of their publications. However, no citation analysis has been conducted to ascertain the impact and influence of this research. In response, we have conducted the first ever citation analysis of 393 global strategy articles in nine leading journals published during the 1990s. Our findings identify the 25 most cited articles in the nine journals, the top 40 authors who publish these most cited articles, and the most cited articles in each of the 16 categories (subfields) of global strategy research. We also find that there is relatively little correlation between the set of 30 most prolific authors identified by Lu [Lu, J.W., 2003. The evolving contributions in international strategic management research. Journal of International Management, 9, 193â€"213.] and our set of 40 most cited authors. Among the 30 most prolific contributors, only eight (27%) have authored one of the top 25 most cited articles. Conversely, 32 (80%) of the 40 authors who publish the top 25 most cited articles are not on the list of most prolific authors. The eight leading authors who excel in both volume and influence of their research: Paul Beamish, John Hagedoorn, Jean-Francois Hennart, W. Chan Kim, Anoop Madhok, Arvind Parkhe, Mike Peng, and Aimin Yanâare surveyed to offer their insights on how to craft high impact research."

Chan, K.C., Fung, H.-G., Leung, W.K. " International Business Research: Trends and School Rankings" (2006) International Business Review, 15 (4), pp. 317-338.
Using 10 years of publication data (1995-2004) from four leading international business journals, we examine global patterns of international business research and school rankings. Although US institutions still lead in the international business research, non-US schools are making significant progress. Asian-Pacific and European schools are well represented among the schools that account for the most articles appearing in the four journals. International collaboration between scholars across the globe appears to enhance school ranking.

Marsh, Sarah J. & Hunt, Courtney, "Not Quite as Simple as A-B-C: Reflections on One Department's Experiences With Publication Ranking", Journal of Management Inquiry, September 2006, Vol. 15, No.3, p.301-315.
"Evaluating the research contributions of faculty members is an important task in the tenure and promotion processes for many departments in a variety of colleges and universities. A few years ago, on behalf of their Department of Management-which is part of the College of Business in a large, Midwestern university-the authors embarked on an effort to create a procedure for rating and ranking academic publication outlets to supplement a recently revised set of tenure and promotion standards. This article describes the process the authors undertook and some of the issues they had to resolve during the effort. They also reflect on the implications of ranking publications for our department and the potential effects of journal ranking on scholarship in the academic community as a whole". [Appendix includes criteria for A-Level, B-Level and C-Level Journals, Appendix B lists 80 journals with average impact factors and ranks.]

Chan, Kam, Fung, Hung-Gay, Lai, Pikki. "Membership of editorial boards and rankings of schools with international business orientation" Journal of International Business Studies. (Jul 2005) Vol. 36, Iss. 4, p. 452
Using 4-year data (1990, 1994, 1998, and 2002), we have provided a ranking of schools with international business (IB) orientation based on the membership of editorial boards of 30 leading international business journals. Participation on the editorial boards of quality journals is highly selective, and should provide a quality indication of the schools. Both quality-unadjusted and adjusted board membership-based ranking are calculated in this study. Several interesting findings are worth noting. First, US schools play a significant leadership role among the leading IB programs. Second, the findings of this study also show the major contribution of non-US schools, which confirms the importance of the global nature of the IB discipline. Third, the top-ranked schools share a number of characteristics. Finally, the correlation among different ranking criteria can be low, particularly for the top-ranked schools, suggesting that care should be exercised in interpreting school ranking.

Swanson, E. P., Wolfe, C. J. and Zardkoohi, A., Concentration in the Major Business Journals: Evidence and Consequences for Accounting, Finance, Management, and Marketing (January 11, 2006).
We first investigate how articles are distributed among universities in a set of 14 highly ranked academic business journals from accounting, finance, management, and marketing over the period from 1990 to 2002. Higher concentration occurs when journals acquire goods (articles) from fewer suppliers (universities and individuals). We find that concentration in accounting and finance exceeds that for management or marketing. Much of the higher concentration in accounting and finance occurs in privately sponsored journals where faculty at private (public) schools publish a relatively high (low) portion of the articles. The market shares of public and private schools in association majors are not significantly different. We report the twenty universities with the largest market share for each accounting journal in Appendix 1 and for each discipline in Appendix 2.

Next, we investigate how articles are distributed among individuals. We find that substantially fewer accounting faculty members publish in a major journal. Despite a similar number of doctoral faculty, management has twice as many different individuals publishing in a major journal as accounting (2350 vs. 1155). Considering only those faculty who publish at least one major journal article, we find that accounting faculty average about two-and-a-half articles, which exceeds finance, management, and marketing. Further, we discover that successful accounting publishers are more likely to be affiliated with highly ranked research universities and private universities than are their business school colleagues. The final question we investigate is whether economic consequences result from discipline publishing differences. We find the proportion of tenure-track faculty obtaining the rank of full professor is similar in finance, management, and marketing but significantly lower in accounting. Comparing salaries, accounting and finance faculty receive a substantial premium over management and marketing in the new doctorate market. Finance full professors retain a good portion of this premium but accounting full professors are paid the same amount as management and marketing. The low number, and high concentration, of accounting major journal articles appears to be manifesting itself in terms of reduced promotion and merit pay.

Hantula, Donald. "The Impact of JOBM: ISI Impact Factor Places the Journal of Organizational Behavior Management Third in Applied Psychology". Journal of Organizational Behavior Management. (2005) Vol. 25, Iss. 3, p. 1-15.
The ISI Impact Factor for JOBM is 1.793, placing it third in the JCR rankings for journals in applied psychology with a sharply accelerating linear trend over the past 5 years. This article reviews the Impact Factor and raises questions regarding its reliability and validity and then considers a citation analysis of JOBM in light of the culture of the Organizational Behavior Management community. It appears that the rise in impact may be attributable to increases in quality, the journal filling a previously unfilled niche and a more theoretical turn in OBM scholarship, and that the Impact Factor underestimates JOBM's influence. JOBM is not a high quality journal because it has a high Impact Factor; rather JOBM currently has a high Impact Factor because it is a high quality journal.

Urbancic, Frank. "Textbook Citations as a Measure of Journal Influence on International Business Education" Journal of Teaching in International Business. (2006). Vol. 17, Iss. 3, p. 45-58
Previously published rankings of journals in relation to international business research are based on a survey method or a journalbased citation method wherein functional discipline journals are excluded from consideration. The narrow focus of these studies has generated criticism for perpetuating an international business silo perspective. In this study the textbook citation method is used as a relevant alternative for the development of an integrated journal ranking that includes both international business journals and functional discipline journals. By application of this method, the study provides objective information concerning the journals that influence international textbook authors, and therefore student awareness of issues in international business.

McWilliams, Abagail, Donald Siegel and David D. Van Fleet, "Scholarly Journals as Producers of Knowledge: Theory and Empirical Evidence Based on Data Envelopment Analysis," Organizational Reserach Methods, Vol. 8 No. 2 (2005):p.185
There have been numerous studies that rank journals based on relative quality. These have generally failed to address some important theoretical and empirical issues relating to productivity. As an alternative, the authors outline a theoretical framework in which an academic journal is considered to be a "producer" of intellectual output. Using the field of management as an example, the authors specify the inputs and outputs of the production process and estimate the relative efficiency of journals using Data Envelopment Analysis. The derived measures of relative productivity are then used to develop a productivity ranking of journals. To explain why some journals use inputs more efficiently than others, the authors regress the estimates of relative efficiency on a set of managerial factors and suggest means to increase relative efficiency. The authors find that increasing the size of the editorial board and reducing both the subscription price and the acceptance rate will enhance the relative performance of an academic journal.

Siemens, Jennifer Christie, et.al. "An Examination of the Relationship Between Research Productivity in Prestigious Business Journals and Popular Press Business School Rankings," Journal of Business Research, Vol. 58, No.4 April, 2005, p.467
"This paper examines the relationship between an objective measure of research productivity in prestigious business journals from 1986-1998 and recent undergraduate and masters business school ratings determined by U.S. News & World Report. These findings are validated over separate sets of U.S. News measures for undergraduate and MBA programs, extended to a smaller set of MBA rankings from Business Week, and address institutions' residuals that indicate whether ratings of the schools are under- or overestimated when research productivity is used as a predictor. The relationship between discipline research productivity and undergraduate and masters business school program rankings also are examined. Results indicate that research productivity is strongly related to undergraduate program ratings with more than 50% of the variance in ratings explained by a school's research productivity scores. Research productivity is more strongly related to undergraduate business school program ratings/rankings than to masters programs ratings/rankings."

Geary, Janet et. al. " Journal Rankings in Business and Management and the 2001 Research Assessment Excercise in the UK,"
British Journal of Management, Vol. 15, No.2, June 2004, p.95
"The public availability of detailed data from the 2001 Research Assessment Exercise in the UK allows an analysis of the publications cited in submissions to the Business and Management panel. Eighty per cent of the 9,942 publications submitted were journal articles. Submissions to the RAE can be scored in terms of the number of citations they make to journals that appear on various lists, such as the Financial Times list. The concentration of articles in a minority of journals, with 50% of all citations to just 126 journals, means that a core list of business and management journals can be compiled. The core list presented contains 562 journals out of the 1582 journal titles that were cited in Business and Management submissions. It includes all journals with more than two citations overall at least one citation in a 5*, 5 or 4 rated submission. It also includes all journals
cited in the RAE from Starbuck's ranked lists of journals and the Financial Times list."

Kumar, Vikas.,Kundu, Sumit. "Ranking the International Business Schools: Faculty Publication as the Measure," Management International Review, (2004) vol. 44, no. 2 pp.213-229
* This study measures and ranks the productivity of academic institutions based on their number of publications from 1991 to 2000, in the top 3 core international business journals.
* This study serves as a useful update of the previous studies by Morrison and Inkpen (1991) and Inkpen and Beamish (1994) examining three core international business journals namely, Management International Review, Journal of International Business Studies, and Journal of World Business. An attempt has been made to better represent the international business research publications and add strength to the generalizability of the findings.
Key Results
* Western University, University of South Carolina, and University of Texas at Austin occupy the top three ranks in terms of publications in MIR, JIBS, and JWB during the 1991-2000 period. These rankings change significantly when analyzed over the five year time periods from 1991-1995 to 1996- 2000.

Linton, J.D., Thongpapanl, N. "Perspective: Ranking the Technology Innovation Management Journals" (2004) Journal of Product Innovation Management, 21 (2), Pages 123-139. Cited 3 times.
A citation analysis of the 10 leading technology and innovation management (TIM) specialty journals is conducted to gain insights into the relative ranking of the journals. The journals are ranked based on number of citations, citations adjusted for publication frequency, citations corrected for age, citations corrected for self-citation, and an overall score. The top 50 journals in management of technology based on citation analysis are listed. Overall, the top 10 journals based on citation analysis are Journal of Product Innovation Management, Research Policy, Research-Technology Management, Harvard Business Review, Strategic Management Journal, Management Science, Administrative Science Quarterly, R&D Management, IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, and Academy of Management Review. The top 10 specialty journals in the technology innovation management specialty are Journal of Product Innovation Management, Research Policy, Research-Technology Management, R&D Management, IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, Technological Forecasting and Social Change, International Journal of Technology Management, Technovation, Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, and Journal of Engineering and Technology Management. It is found that many of the TIM journals, although focused on TIM, have additional foci based on traditional management disciplines. Each of the 10 leading TIM specialty journals is considered from the perspective of traditional management disciplines; how the journals relate to each other and the related implications of these findings are considered.

Paul, K. (2004) "Business and Society and Business Ethics Journals: A Citation and Impact Analysis." Journal of Scholarly publishing, January 2004
Business & Society (B&S), Business Ethics Quarterly (BEQ), and the Journal of Business Ethics (JBE) are leading journals in the related fields of business ethics and business and society. Citations may be used as an indicator of relative influence. An analysis of their 2001 citations to one another and to the Academy of Management Journal and the Academy of Management Review is presented, showing that an argument could be made for ranking for any of the three journals first, depending on criteria used for judgement and the definition of the universe of those being influenced. The journal most widely recognized among management scholars in general is JBE; however, BEQ and B&S are favoured by experts in their respective sub-disciplines, with B&S citations indicating a closer relationship to the Academy of Management journals.

Polonsky, Michael Jay. (2004) "Journal Rankings: Does One Size Fit All". Australasian Marketing Journal 12 (2): 64-66.
"The question of ranking journals, institutions, individual academics and specific papers is regularly visited within business and management disciplines. The Mort et al paper allows individuals in Australia and New Zealand to have some idea of the perceptual rankings of journals by senior academics. As such, it communicates valuable information to those who might be evaluated by these senior academics. The question of whether this is how the research performance of all staff, across institutions and across levels within institutions, should be measured is something that needs to be considered in the future. Arguably, one size does not fit all. [the "Mort et al " reference above refers to an article found elsewhere in this same issue of the Australasian Marketing Journal and which is listed in this bibliography under Mort.]

Swanson, Edward "Publishing in the Majors: A Comparison of Accounting, Finance, Management, and Marketing" Contemporary Accounting Research. (Spring 2004) Vol. 21, Iss. 1, p. 223-255
Business schools evaluate publication records, especially for the promotion and tenure decision, by comparing the quality and quantity of a candidate's research with those of peers within the same discipline (intradisciplinary) and with those of academics from other business disciplines (interdisciplinary). A recently developed analytical model of the research review process provides theory about the norms used by editors and referees in deciding whether to publish research papers. The model predicts that interdisciplinary differences exist in quality norms, which could result in disparity among business disciplines in the number of top-tier articles published. I examine the period from 1980 to 1999 and, consistent with the theory, find that significant differences exist in the number of articles and proportion of doctoral faculty who published in the "major" journals in accounting, finance, management, and marketing. Most notably, the proportion of doctoral faculty publishing a major article is 1.4 to 2.4 times greater in the other business disciplines than in accounting (depending on the set of journals). The theory also predicts an upward drift over time in the quality norms used by referees. Consistent with a drift, the number of articles published has declined substantially in marketing and, to a lesser extent, in the other business disciplines.

Chan, K.C., Fok, R.C.W. "Membership on Editorial Boards and Finance Department Rankings" (2003) Journal of Financial Research, 26 (3), pp. 405-420. Cited 5 times.
We examine membership on editorial boards of sixteen leading finance journals in 1985, 1990, 1995, and 2000. Membership on a board of a high-quality journal is highly selective. Editors and members of editorial boards of quality journals are trusted by their peers who submit their research for publication consideration. Thus, the number of faculty represented on editorial boards of quality journals should provide a quality indication of the finance department. We use membership representation to provide a ranking of finance departments adjusted for department size and journal quality.

Lu, Jane W., "The Evolving Contributions in International Strategic Management Research, Journal of International Management vol.9, no. 2 (2003) pg.193-213

Lu, Jane W., " The Evolving Contributions in International Strategic Management Research, Journal of International Management vol.9, no. 2 (2003) pg.193-213

"In this study, I systematically investigate the evolving contributions and gaps that exist in the international strategic management (ISM) literature. The research I present here reviews leading international business and strategic management journals from 1991 through 2000. The research investigates the topics that have been examined in ISM research, theoretical perspectives employed, outlets for publication, and the breadth of contributions to ISM research. The article also highlights areas in the literature that may provide promising avenues for future research."

Kai-Uwe Brock, Jurgen "The 'Power' of International Business Research", Journal of International Business Studies, 34:1
(Jan 2003): 90-99. (Available in paper in the Business Library)
"Statistical power is the probability of accepting the null hypothesis when it is false (type II error). This research note reports the results of a statistical power analysis of international business research published in the Journal of International Business Studies, Management International Review, the Academy of Management Journal, and the Strategic Management Journal from 1990 to 1999. The results show that, although average statistical power is high compared with other disciplines, it is sufficient only for large effect sizes (ES). Only studies published in the Journal of International Business Studies and the Academy of Management Journal achieve average statistical power levels that are sufficient for both medium and large ESs. Still the observed likelihood of committing type II errors in international business research is very high for small ESs (92%) and high for medium ESs (45%). In addition, statistical power is not explicitly mentioned or used by international business researchers, a weakness that this note is designed to change."

Werner, Steve.,"Recent Developments in International Management Research: A Review of 20 Top Management Journals" Journal of Management 2002, Vol.28, Iss. 3, pg.277-305
This review analyzes recent trends in the international management (IM) literature from 1996 to 2000. The 271 articles located in 20 top management journals are categorized into 12 distinct topics: 1. the global business environment, 2. internationalization, 3. entry mode decision, 4. international joint ventures, 5. foreign direct investment, 6. international exchange, 7. transfer of knowledge, 8 strategic alliances and networks, 9. multinational enterprises, 10. subsidiary-headquarters relations, 11. subsidiary and multinational management team management, and 12. expatriate management. Research in each of these areas is presented and linkages between the areas are reviewed.

DuBois, Frank L & David Reeb, "Ranking the International Business Journals: A Reply," Journal of International Business Studies, First Quarter 2001. Vol. 32, Iss. 1; pg. 197.
"In the comment about our ranking of international business journals, we were impressed by the passion of Professor Inkpen and intrigued that this service article had generated such debate. To briefly recap, we sought to identify and rank 30 journals in the international business domain. Our approach was to use both citation analysis and a survey of perceived journal quality. Our motivation was that while we have an understanding of the relative ranking of journals within our respective foundation disciplines and how JIBS fits into such rankings, we did not have any insight into the relative pecking order of IB journals. As such, we sought to remedy this situation and share this analysis with our colleagues."

Walstrom, Kent A. " A Review of the Relative Prestige of Business Research Journals," The Serials Librarian, Vol.41, No.2, 2001, p.85

Zhou, Duanning & Jian Ma, Efraim Turban, "Journal Quality Assessment: An Integrated Subjective and Objective Approach
IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, Nov 2001. Vol. 48, Iss. 4; pg. 479.
"Many universities, research institutions, and government funding agencies are continuously attempting to grade or rank journals for their academic value. Such grading is needed both for funding and resource allocation purposes and for personnel decisions. In grading journals, objective information, such as the impact factors and/or subjective information, such as experts' judgements about the journals, are used. This paper presents a methodology that integrates both types of information, providing a comprehensive method for assessing the quality of journals. The method employs a fuzzy set approach that also deals with the imprecise and missing information frequently inherited in the evaluation process. The proposed evaluation model is implemented in a Web-based system."

Zickar, Michael J. & Scott Highhouse, "Measuring the Prestige of Journals in Industrial-Organizational Psychology," The Industrial-Organizational Psychologist, Vol. 38/No. 4 April, 2001,

DuBois, Frank L & David Reeb, "Ranking the International Business Journals," Journal of International Business Studies, Fourth Quarter 2000. Vol. 31, Iss. 4; pg. 689.
"This study seeks to assess and rank the relative quality of 30 international business journals using both a citation analysis and a survey approach. Journal rankings are presented using both approaches in addition to a composite ranking. The rankings provide an objective analysis of journal quality for tenure and promotion committees, for IB researchers considering journal submission options and provide the academic community with a better understanding of which international business publication outlets are the most influential in guiding research in this discipline."

Van Fleet, David, Abagail McWilliams , Donald Siegel. "A Theoretical and Empirical Analysis of Journal Rankings: The Case of Formal Lists", Journal of Management, 2000. Vol. 26, Iss. 5, pg.839-861
This study examines the use of formal rankings of journals by management departments for personnel decision purposes. It is posited that the probability of adopting a list of formal rankings is related to a set of characteristics of the department. Few schools have formal lists of journals. Our empirical findings imply that the probability of adopting a list is positively correlated with the perceived quality of the department. Considerable variation exists across such lists and across different institutions in the perceptions of the quality of journals. This suggests that, although lists may reduce the level of uncertainty regarding the assessment of research quality by providing explicit targets, lists may also induce faculty members to develop institutional-specific human capital. This could reduce faculty mobility and impede career development.

Forrester, John P., Watson, Sheilah S., "An Assessment of Public Administration Journals: The Perspective of Editors and Editoral Board Members", Public Administration Review, 54:5 (Sep/Oct 1994): 474-482. (Available in DBW or LAW)
"The boundaries and characteristics of public administration are partly shaped and defined by professional journals. Research stratifies the journals responsible for disseminating theoretical and practical knowledge in the discipline of public administration, including the fields of policy analysis, budgeting and finance, personnel administration, and organization studies. Based on a survey of editors and editorial board members, a study identifies and ranks the top 10 journals in each field. Results indicated that the most highly ranked journals have broad mission statements, focus on core public administration issues, have stringent review requirements, and are published in the US."

MacMillan, Ian C. "The Emerging Forum for Business Policy Scholars," Journal of Business Venturing, Mar 1994. Vol. 9, Iss. 2; pg. 85.
"A study follows up on 3 other studies published in Strategic Management Journal in 1987, 1989, and 1991. A sample of tenured business policy scholars, with significant track records in publishing, rated key management journals with respect to their appropriateness as outlets for scholarly research in the business policy field. The top-rated journal continues to be the Strategic Management Journal, followed by Administrative Science Quarterly, Academy of Management Journal, Academy of Management Review, and Management Science. "

Chandy, P R, Williams, Thomas G E. "The Impact of Journals and Authors on International Business,
Journal of International Business Studies. Vol. 25, Iss. 4; 1994, pg.715.
"Citational analysis is used to examine the influence of individuals and disciplines on international business research. Citational data over the 10-year period 1984-1993 from every issue of the Journal of International Business Studies (JIBS) is collected. It is found that management, economics, marketing and finance disciplines have had significant influence on international business research. Researchers such as Dunning, Porter, Vernon, Casson, Rugman and Hofstede are identified as having made significant contributions to international business research."

Morrison, Allen. J. and Inkpen, Andrew. C. "An analysis of Significant Contributions to the International Business Literature", Journal of International Business Studies, 22:1 (1991): q143-153.
"The growing interest in international business has been accompanied by a significant rise in the volume of international business research. The international business publication records for both authors and academic institutions are examined for the period 1980-1989. Nine publications containing some 659 international business articles are reviewed: 1. Journal of International Business Studies, 2. Columbia Journal of World Business, 3. Harvard Business Review, 4. Journal of Marketing, 5. Academy of Management Journal, 6. Academy of Management Review, 7. Journal of Marketing Research, 8. Journal of Finance, and 9. American Economic Review. The institutional publishing records at 2 key international business journals, Columbia Journal of World Business and Journal of International Business Studies, are reviewed to ascertain whether certain universities show a greater propensity to publish in particular outlets. Clear publishing patterns for both authors and institutions were apparent for the 1980s."

Henderson, Glenn V., Jr.; Ganesh, Gopala K.; Chandy, P. R."Across-Discipline Journal Awareness and Evaluation: Implications for the Promotion and Tenure Process," Journal of Economics and Business. Nov 1990. Vol. 42, Iss. 4, p. 325.
(Available in paper at the Business Library and on ScholarsPortal).
"Publishing business scholars were surveyed to assess their familiarity with journals in the various fields taught in a college of business. The initial sample consisted of 1,046 people who had published in a top-rated journal in one of the business fields in 1985 or 1986; a total of 474 usable responses were received. The results suggest that even well-read scholars are less knowledgeable about journals outside their fields. The respondents knew the top 2 or 3 journals in other fields and perceived them to be of good quality, but for journals below that level, they indicated that they had "no knowledge." There were identifiable cohort groups in some cases that were more aware of each others' journals. There were also fields whose journals were less well-known than others, most notably management information systems. The evidence indicated that publishing faculty tend to be specialists. However, the promotion and tenure process often presumes that such faculty can evaluate the publication records of faculty from other specialties. The results raise questions as to the validity of such a presumption."

Macmillan, I.C., "Delineating a Forum for Business Policy Scholars." Strategic Management Journal, Vol.10, No.4 (1989): 391-395.
A sample of tenured business policy scholars, with substantial experience in publishing, rated important management journals with regard to their appropriateness as outlets for scholarly research in the business policy field. The top-rated journals are: 1. Strategic Management Journal, 2. Administrative Science Quarterly, and 3. Academy of Management Journal. Management Science, Harvard Business Review, and Academy of Management Review are at the next level. Sloan Management Review and California Management Review are next, followed by the lower group, consisting of: 1. Journal of Management Studies, 2. Organizational Dynamics, 3. Journal of Business Strategy, 4. Long Range Planning, 5. Journal of Management, and 6. Interfaces

Urbancic, Frank. R. "Measuring the Eminence is a Desirable Goal for Business Schools to Attain", Akron Business & Economic Review, 20:3 (Fall 1989), p.29
"Eminence is a desirable goal for business schools to attain. However, a consensus set of variables capable of representing business school eminence does not exist. Eminence among business schools was measured by considering the extent of faculty representation on the editorial boards of leading scholarly business journals. Eight journals were selected, 2 for each of the 4 business areas: finance, accounting, management, and marketing. A selective approach was employed to facilitate a longitudinal analysis of board membership. The editorial boards that were examined for each journal consisted of the boards as constituted in the years 1987, 1982, 1977, 1972, and 1967. The analysis produced a total of 1,536 business faculty with affiliations among 206 universities worldwide. Faculty affiliated with the 41 business schools classified as eminent held 71.6% of the editorial board memberships. The top school was the University of Chicago, followed by the University of Pennsylvania."

Petry, Glenn. and Settle, John. "A Comprehensive Analysis of Worldwide Scholarly Productivity in Selected US Business Journals", Quarterly Review of Economies and Business, 28:3 (1988): 90.
"The productivity of publishers of 19 scholarly journals of business is analyzed for the period 1979-1983. Contributions of government, corporations, and domestic and foreign universities are included. The analysis shows ranking of productivity by institution, by institution per faculty member, by states, by degrees offered, and a comparison with the earlier study by Henry and Burch (1974). The top 20 institutions account for roughly one-third of the publications in the top journals. This percentage has increased since the 1967-1971 period covered by Henry and Burch. When an institution's productivity is adjusted for faculty size, some rankings change dramatically. Universities offering only doctorate and master degree programs have the highest productivity level, and those that do not offer a doctoral program have the lowest. Per capita contributions by state show that Massachusetts has the most intensive research enclave. "

Petry, Glenn & John Settle "A Statistical Analysis of Worldwide Coauthorship Relationships in Scholarly Journals of Business," Journal of Economics and Business. New York: May 1988. Vol. 40, Iss. 2; p. 169. (Available in Business Library and on ScholarsPortal)
"The trend of coauthoring articles as noted by Petry and Kerr (1981) is continuing because of the increasing pressure to publish and rising complexity of researching subjects. A study analyzed 68,938 pages in 19 notable journals of business (excluding economics/business journals) that ranked high in peer rating studies, and coauthorship trends were computer analyzed for notes, review articles, articles, communications, and comments. Each author received proportionate credit. The study concluded that the trend in coauthorship has continued to increase. In a regression study with percentage of pages coauthored as the dependent variable, the most important independent variable affecting coauthorship was the total of pages published. At schools with a low publication rate, most work was coauthored, probably because of low research support, interest, or incentive. Where publication is high, coauthorship seems to be encouraged by a great amount of scholarly activity, a good reward system, or the advanced type of research being done."

MacMillan, Ian C., Stern, Ilene."Delineating a Forum for Business Policy Scholars," Strategic Management Journal. Mar/Apr 1987. Vol. 8, Iss. 2; pg. 183.
"The results of a survey conducted among widely acknowledged scholars in the field of business policy are summarized. The project involved 3 stages. First, 19 tenured management professors were asked to name other scholars who were qualified to help delineate a forum for business policy scholars. In the 2nd stage, respondents were asked to add or delete from a list of publications that had been identified in a similar study conducted in 1984. In stage 3, a questionnaire was developed in which respondents were asked to rate publications. Although more publications were considered appropriate in 1986 than in 1984, the respondents generally were much stricter in their assessment of the 1986 journals, as evidenced by the large number of publications whose ratings declined over the 2 years. In light of this, the improvement in ratings of Strategic Management Journal and The Journal of Management Studies is particularly noteworthy. The resulting list of well-regarded publications reflects the diversity of the sample of scholars. "

Niemi, A. W., 1987. "Institutional Contributions to the Leading Finance Journals, 1975 through 1986: A Note", The Journal of Finance 42, 1389-1397. (Available in the Business Library)

Niemi, A. W., 1988. "Research Productivity of American Business Schools, 1975-85", Review of Business and Economic Research, Spring 1988, 1-17. (Available in the Business Library)

Henry, W. R. & Burch, E. E. 1974. "Institutional Contributions to Scholarly Journals of Business". Journal of Business, 47, 56-66.
(Available in paper at the Business Library).



Wang , Yue. "Extending the "P" perspective: An institutional account of management research in Australia" Asia Pacific Journal of Management Jun 2009.  Vol. 26,  Iss. 2,  p. 353-360 (8 pp.)

This commentary evaluates the problems associated with creating rankings of individuals and institutions in International Business. It argues that the many-potentially arbitrary-decisions involved make the creation of rankings a hazardous affair.

Abagail McWilliams,  Andy Lockett,  Jeremy Katz,  David D Van Fleet. "Who is Talking to Whom? The Network of Intellectual Influence in Management Research" Journal of Applied Management and Entrepreneurship. Apr 2009.  Vol. 14,  Iss. 2,  p. 61-81 (21 pp.)
Expanding recent interest in management journals, we addressed the question of "who is talking to whom" by modeling the social network of management scholars using citation patterns between 23 management journals over a five-year period. Using cluster analysis, we found that there are a number of distinct sub-networks of journals, where the exchange of knowledge is greater within than across groups. These sub-networks appear to be determined by thematic, methodological, geographic and practical-orientation differences. Understanding those networks should enable those using management journals to focus and hopefully simplify their reading efforts.

Macdonald, Stuart,  Jacqueline Kam. "Quality journals and gamesmanship in management studies." Management Research News.  2008.  Vol. 31,  Iss. 8,  p. 595-606

Publication in quality journals has become a major indicator of research performance in UK universities. The purpose of this paper is to investigate the notion of "quality journal". The paper examines the situation in management studies and finds dizzying circularity in the definitions of "quality journal". The paper finds that what a quality journal is does not really matter: agreement that there are such things matters very much indeed. As so often happens with indicators of performance, the indicator has become the target. So, the challenge is to publish in quality journals, and the challenge rewards gamesmanship. Vested interests have become particularly skilful at the game, and at exercising the winners' prerogative of changing the rules. All but forgotten in the desperation to win the game is publication as a means of communicating research findings for the public benefit. The paper examines the situation in management studies, but the problem is much more widespread. This original and topical paper concludes that laughter is both the appropriate reaction to such farce, and also, perhaps, the stimulus to reform.

Yuyuenyongwatana, Robert P ,  Shawn M Carraher.  "Academic Journal Ranking: Important to Strategic Management and General Management Researchers?" Journal of Business Strategies.  Fall 2008.  Vol. 25,  Iss. 2,  p. 1-8 (8 pp.)
This study explores two questions pertaining to research publications: the importance of publications, and the perceived ranking of strategic and general management journals. The reasons why research publishing is important are 1) it is part of the pursuit of knowledge, 2) it has extrinsic rewards to those publishing, and 3) it may increase the prestige of the institution with which the publishing faculty is affiliated. On the second question, the authors have conducted a survey of perceived journal rankings. The results from 50 journals suggest that there is a consensus of rankings. As such, an institution may reasonably use these rankings as a basis for evaluations of research quality. Areas for future research are suggested.

Azar, Ofer H. & David M. Brock.
“A Citation-Based Ranking of Strategic Management Journals,” Journal of Economics & Management Strategy. Fall 2008.  Vol. 17,  Iss. 3,  p. 781
Rankings of strategy journals are important for authors, readers, and promotion and tenure committees. We present several rankings, based either on the number of articles that cited the journal or the per article impact. Our analyses cover various periods between 1991 and 2006, for most of which the Strategic Management Journal was in first place and Journal of Economics & Management Strategy (JEMS) second, although JEMS ranked first in certain instances. Long Range Planning and Technology Analysis & Strategic Management also achieve a top position. Strategic Organization makes an impressive entry and achieves a top position in 2003-2006. [PUBLICATION ABSTRACT]

Harris, Claudia
"Ranking the Management Journals,"
Journal of Scholarly Publishing Volume 39, Number 4, July 2008

The goal of this project was to create a ranking of journals in management and related areas. This compilation is designed for use as an aid in appraising the performance of faculty members and as a guide to potential authors seeking outlets for their work. The information in this analysis does not alter the well-accepted top-tier list of journals; instead, it provides differentiation among the remaining vast majority of journals. The rationale for developing such a list and the ways in which this list compares with those previously accessible are discussed. The methodology used to rank journals is presented, along with a description of the results. A listing of journals ranked in the top five categories is provided in the Appendix.

Chrisman, James H. et al.

"Management Journals as Venues for Publication of Family Business Research. "
Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, Sep 2008. Vol. 32, Iss. 5, p. 927-934

Based on the assessments of 40 prominent family business scholars, this study provides the first ranking of management journals as outlets for family business research. In all, 22 management journals are evaluated on both their appropriateness and quality. Implications and future research opportunities are discussed


Golden-biddle, Karen & Karen Locke and Trish Reay, "Using Knowledge in Management Studies: An Investigation of How We Cite Prior Work," Journal of Management Inquiry, September 2006, Vol.15, No.3, pp.237-254.
"We know little about the impact of prior scholarly work. Focusing on citation frequency, studies have overlooked the question of how prior work is used. The authors argue for the development of a richer empirical foundation on which to base discussions of impact; its creation requires a situated and relational methodological approach incorporating an assumption of citation heterogeneity and comparative analyses of citation content in context with that of the referenced focal article. Conceiving focal articles as architectures of knowledge claims, the authors examine how knowledge from three award-winning articles is subsequently used during a 6-year period in 489 citations. Analyses generate a typology of prior knowledge use in citing and also disclose differences in prior knowledge use in each focal article. This situated and relational examination provides a more nuanced understanding of how prior work shapes ongoing knowledge development."

Van Fleet, D.D, Ray, D.F, Bedeian, A.G, Downey, H.K, Hunt, J.G., Griffin, R.W., Dalton, D., Vecchio, R.P., Kacmar, K.M, and Feldman, D.C. "The Journal of Management's first 30 years" (2006) Journal of Management, 32 (4), pp. 477-506.
The Journal of Management, now one of the preeminent journals in the discipline, completed its 30th year of publication in 2004. To provide an understanding of the journal's development, this article reviews its origins as recounted in reflections by its past editors, examines three decades of publication statistics, and provides a brief look at the journal's possible future. Thus, this is a history of the journal, a glimpse into the work of its editors, and a brief case study of organizational evolution.

Podsakoff, Philip, MacKenzie, Scott, Bachrach, Daniel and Podsakoff, Nathan. "The influence of management journals in the 1980s and 1990s" Strategic Management Journal. (May 2005) Vol. 26, Iss. 5, p. 473-488
It is difficult to get a clear picture of the relative influence of management journals because previous studies have focused on a single sub-area in the field over a relatively restricted number of years, and/or have used inconsistent criteria to judge journal influence. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to examine journal influence using citations from 28 journals over the past two decades. The findings show that the top seven journals accounted for 61 percent of all of the citations in the journals included, and that the three journals that showed the greatest increase in influence over the past 20 years were AMJ, AMR, and SMJ.

Kacmar, Michele K. & J. Michael Whitfield, "An Additional Rating Method for Journal Articles in the Field of Management," Organizational Research Methods, October 2000, Vol.3, No.4, pp.392-406.
"A frequently used method for determining the influence rating of a journal article is the citation count. This article argues that simply counting citations may not be sufficient. Instead, to gain a fuller understanding of the influence of an article on future research, the importance of the cited reference to the citing article should be examined. To illustrate this suggested method, a sample of articles from Academy of Management Review and Academy of Management Journal was analyzed. Results indicated that the vast majority of the citing articles simply listed the focal articles as references instead of using them as an integral component (i.e., a test of the ideas) of the study. Augmenting the traditional citation-counting approach with the proposed technique should produce a more accurate picture of the influence of an article on the field"

Tahai, Alireza, Michael J Meyer. "A Revealed Preference Study of Management Journals' Direct Influences, Strategic Management Journal, Mar 1999. Vol.20, Iss.3, pg.279
A new methodology for analyzing journal citations to recent publications to determine which management journals now have the greatest influence on the field of management is developed and used. The 23,637 academic journal references cited in the 1,275 articles published in 17 key management journals during 1993 and 1994 are analyzed, focusing on citations to references published up to the modal vintage of 4 years earlier. Most cited as a percentage of all these references was Strategic Management Journal followed by Academy of Management Journal, Journal of Applied Psychology, Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Academy of Management Review, Administrative Sciences Quarterly, and Journal of Management - accounting in total for 51% of all citations. Measures of journal influence provide information which can aid management scholars, practitioners, department heads, and university libraries to decide on efficient choices of journals for research and for manuscript submissions, for evaluation, and for subscriptions.

Parnell, John. A. "Assessing Management Journal Quality: A Methodological Critique and Empirical Analysis", Mid-Atlantic Journal of Business, 33:1 (March 1997): 69-83.
"Most attempts to assess the quality of managment journals have relied on expert opinion surveys or citation counts. However, neither method provides for the objective evaluation of articles published in the journals to be assessed. A study reports on an assessment that emphasized blind reviews and included both practicing managers and scholars in the evaluation process. Results suggested that managers and scholars disagree sharply in their assessment of high and low quality journals. Hence, the method employed to distinguish top journals from others significantly affects those journals identified as superior."

Johnson, J.L. and Padsakoff, P.M., "Journal Influence in the Field of Management: An Analysis Using Salanick's Index in a Dependency Network," Academy of Management Journal, 37:5 (1994): 1392-1407.(Available in paper in the Business Library)
"Changes in the influence of 40 publications relevant to the field of management between 1981 and 1986 and between 1986 and 1991 were investigated using Salncik's (1986) index of influence in a dependency network. Although the influence of many of the top journals stayed relatively stable over the decade, some notable changes occurred. The publications with the greatest increases in influence were the Academy of Management Review, the Academy of Management Journal, Strategic Management Journal, and Research in Organizational Behavior; Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes and the Psychological Bulletin had the greatest decreases. The results also provided general support for the validity of Salancik's index."

Extejt, M.M. and Smith, J.E. "The Behavioural Sciences and Management: An Evaluation of Relevant Journals", Journal of Management, 16:3 (1990): 539-551. (Available in paper in the Business Library and on ScholarsPortal)
No abstract available

Franke, Richard H., Timothy W. Edlund and Frederick Oster, III "The Development of Strategic Management: Journal Quality and Article Impact" Strategic Management Journal, 1990, vol.11, 243-253)
"An analysis is presented of the influence of management and business policy publication between 1977 and 1988. A sample of 17 management/business policy journals, 1984 and 1986 expert assessments of journal quality, and an index of expert familiarity with each journal were obtained from MacMillan and Stern (1987). Objective quality measures of scholarly influence substantiate the MacMillan and Stern expert ratings of management/business policy journals. Relative positions among the sampled journals shift over time, and 2 recently initiated publications have risen to first, 2nd, or 3rd place for current article impact in 1987 and 1988. The success of strategic management journals is related to the level of editorial research stature. It may also be associated with situational factors, such as location and prestige, that contribute to journal visibility. Over 12 years, the influence of strategic management journals upon publications in scholarly periodicals rose several-fold."

Coe and Weinstock. "Evaluating Management Journals: A Second Look",Academy of Management Journal, 27:3 (1984),p.660 (Available in paper in the Business Library)
"The image of a scholarly journal is important in the academic world. Journal image provides a basis for decisions concerning publishing among authors, university administrators, and committees. The images of business-related journals were the focus of a survey research study using questionnaires designed to obtain ratings and estimations of manuscript selection rates. Questionnaires were completed by 114 management department chairpersons. Of 16 journals listed, the highest ratings were accorded Administrative Science Quarterly and Academy of Management Journal. The journals mentioned most frequently in response to an open-ended question about journals not listed were Organizational Behavior and Human Performance (22 responses) and Journal of Applied Psychology (21 responses). Respondents tended to overestimate acceptance rates of highly perceived journals, overestimating for 13 of 16 listed journals. A strong negative correlation surfaced between journals' perceived prestige or quality and perceived acceptance rates. These results do not differ greatly from those of a similar study performed in 1968.



Hult, G Tomas; M; Ferrell, O C.
“A Tribute to Forty Years of Top-level Marketing Research,” Academy of Marketing Science. Journal 40. 1  (Jan 2012): 1-7.
This issue marks the beginning of the 40th volume of the Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science. The thicker-than-usual issue is designated as the 40th Anniversary Issue of the Journal. To commemorate the Journal's anniversary, the collection of cutting-edge and innovative research articles in this issue addresses all of the broad topics in marketing (i.e., marketing strategy, consumer behavior, modeling, public policy, and methods/methodology) to exemplify the breadth of the Journal's scope. In this spirit, our introduction to the 40th Anniversary Issue briefly provides (1) an overview of JAMS and some tidbits about the Journal, (2) a section on the impact of JAMS, (3) a description of the 11 articles in the issue, and (4) some concluding thoughts. Overall, JAMS has had remarkable impact in the field of marketing for four decades, escalating in the last two decades to become a top tier journal for the marketing professorate. By some accounts, some 500 of the roughly 1,500 JAMS articles published to date have made a remarkably high impact in the field of marketing (and social sciences). The incredible slate of authors contributing to the Anniversary Issue is a testament to the Journal's standing in the field.

Rosenstreich, Daniela; Wooliscroft, Ben.
“Assessing International Journal Impact: The Case of Marketing
 European Business Review 24. 1  (2012): 58-87.
Purpose - Potential ethnocentric biases in stated preference journal rankings are reviewed and revealed preference ranking methods are investigated. The aim of the paper is to identify an approach to ranking journals that minimises ethnocentric biases and better represents the international impact of research. Design/methodology/approach - Coverage of marketing journals in Ulrich's, EBSCO, SSCI, JCR, Scopus and Google Scholar is explored. Citing references to 20 articles are analysed to determine citation time lags and explore the content of SSCI, Scopus and Google Scholar. To further review the extent of citation coverage, h-index scores are generated for ten marketing journals using data from SSCI, Scopus and Google Scholar. In total, 36 marketing journals are ranked using the g-index and Google Scholar data and results are compared to ten published rankings. Findings - Stated preference ranking studies of marketing journals rely on US-based respondents. The coverage of EBSCO, SSCI, JCR and Scopus databases is not representative of marketing's literature as they have few international sources, and a disproportionate coverage of US-based journals. Google Scholar provides broader international coverage. The Impact Factor may be inappropriate for marketing journals as a large proportion of citations occur more than five years post-publication. Results indicate that the g-index is a superior approach to measuring the impact of marketing journals internationally. Practical implications - Exposure of the limitations in existing ranking methods should encourage improvements in the development and use of journal rankings. Originality/value - The investigations present original evidence to support long-term concerns about approaches to journal ranking and citation analysis.

Yoo, Myongjee; Lee, Sojung; Bai, Billy.
“Hospitality Marketing Research from 2000 to 2009,  International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management 23. 4  (2011): 517-532.
Purpose - The purpose of this study is to provide an analysis of published marketing research within the top four hospitality journals and suggest future research directions. Design/methodology/approach - The study selects the top four hospitality-oriented journals and analyzes the topics, methods, and trends of hospitality marketing articles published between 2000 and 2009 through a qualitative research design using content analysis and descriptive analysis. Findings - The study explores how hospitality marketing research has progressed within the past decade in terms of topical areas, industry applications, and methods, and additionally discovers notable trends for hospitality marketing research. Practical implications - The study analyzes published research in hospitality marketing and is thus expected to provide topical and methodological recommendations to academic scholars in contributing further to scientific progress and the literature. Originality/value - Based on the existing reviews, this study aims to examine hospitality marketing research developments in top hospitality research journals over the past decade. It is the first study to review hospitality marketing research for a period of ten years in the recognized top four hospitality research journals.

For additional information about the ranking of marketing journals see the useful section - "Topics Related to Journal Rankings"- on the American Marketing Association web site. It provides such things as:
Literature and Tables - a collection of articles including many empirical tables;
ELMAR Essays - some opinions about the notion of ranking journals in general;
Related Resources- instituitional rankings, other collections and useful links;
Other Related Disciplines- Rankings from some other business disciplines;
Article Citation Counts - the most cited articles in the four AMA journals.


Polonsky, Michael Jay,   Les Carlson." Is There General Global Inclusion in Publishing Within the Five Leading Advertising Journals and Does This Relate to General Publishing Performance?". American Academy of Advertising. Conference. Proceedings (Online). 2008.  p. 90-101 (12 pp.)

The question has been raised in academia whether there is global inclusion of authors in publishing. This has generally not been explored in the 30 years of research on advertising research activity and those works that do exist in advertising have generally only examined three North American focused journals. This paper expands the set of journals to five advertising focused journals and thus is a global examination of publishing in advertising. Within these five advertising journals there is an increased international involvement and thus it appears that a broader set of perspectives are being considered in the advertising literature. We also found that there is a positive correlation between publishing in the five leading advertising journals and four leading generalist journals, suggesting that institutions may be developing broader research cultures, rather than targeting works only in advertising.

Svensson, Göran . "Scholarly journal ranking(s) in marketing: single- or multi-item measures?"  Marketing Intelligence & Planning. 2008.  Vol. 26,  Iss. 4,  p. 340-352

The topic of scholarly journals is important to the marketing discipline and the worldwide research communities, due to the way the journals are categorized and judged in available and compiled journal rankings. The purpose of this paper is to describe and discuss the underlying measures of journal rankings in scholarly journals in marketing. It is limited to the scholarly journals and journal rankings of the marketing discipline. Journal rankings of scholarly journals in marketing are mainly based upon single-item measures based upon either citations or perceptions, without any estimates of validity, reliability or generality. There is a need to move away from the predominantly single-item measure syndrome that characterizes most of the available and compiled journal rankings in marketing. Broader approaches should be implemented and applied in journal rankings based upon multi-item measures. Re-assessment of the activity of ranking journals is long overdue if the ranking lists themselves do not consider a minimum of scientific rigor and soundness as required in other areas of scholarly endeavours. The marketing discipline may be at risk of entering a vicious and irreversible circle of decline and decomposition.

Svensson, Göran,  Thomas Helgesson,  Terje Slåtten,  Bård Tronvoll. "Scientific identity of "top" research journals in the broader discipline of marketing:Findings and queries" European Business Review. 2008.  Vol. 20,  Iss. 5,  p. 384-400
The purpose of this paper is to describe the "scientific identity" of the "top" research journals in the broader discipline of marketing by examining the methodological approaches and the geographical affiliations of authors published in selected journals. A sample of "top" research journals in marketing is selected on the basis of expert opinion and journal ranking lists. The selection includes the Journal of Consumer Research (JCR), Journal of Marketing (JM), Journal of Marketing Research (JMR), Journal of Retailing (JR), Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science (JAMS); and Marketing Science (MS). The "scientific identities" of JCR, JM, JMR, JR, JAMS and MS are revealed as being built on quantitative research designs and the North American paradigm of research values. In fact, all journals are US-based. None was found to be based on a mix of empirical research designs. The selected research journals were found to be narrowly focused, and the lack of variety of "scientific identities" among the journals studied here is discomfiting for the ongoing scientific knowledge building and theory generation in marketing. Further studies of the "scientific identity" of individual research journals are desirable in other sub-disciplines of marketing. A series of questions have been raised that the authors argue are worthy of further attention and debate in the world-wide research community. Researchers will benefit from insights into the "scientific identities" of the "top" research journals in the broader discipline of marketing. In particular, researchers can note the particular feature of dogmatic narrowness of research designs that are present in all of these journals. The study delivers insights into the publishing requirements of "top" research journals in the broader discipline of marketing. It provides some challenging and discomfiting findings.

Hofacker, Charles F , Mark R Gleim, Stephanie J Lawson.
"Revealed reader preference for marketing journals" Academy of Marketing Science. Journal. Jun 2009. Vol. 37, Iss. 2, p. 238
In this paper we assess the reading preference for marketing journals by deriving a journal utility scale based on click responses to table of contents postings to the ELMAR virtual community. Use of ELMAR data provides a unique window into journal importance, allowing us to look at table of contents reading behavior rather than citing behavior or attitudinal constructs as has been the case in previous studies. At the time of the study, there were more than 5,100 ELMAR subscribers, easily making this the largest journal ranking study ever undertaken. The external validity of our sample is high since ELMAR subscribers include a high percentage of the population of those interested in scholarly research in marketing. Our results are based on actual choice behavior of subscribers as they simply decide what tables of contents to read. The list of journals included in the study contains 165 different titles posted during the study period, which spanned a year. During that period there were multiple issues posted of these 165 journals, resulting in a replicated field study with high reliability. In fact, our journal reading utility measurement yielded a model with an R^2 value of .95. We use this model to suggest ways that researchers might come to a richer understanding of the journal consumption process. [PUBLICATION ABSTRACT]

Ford, John B ,  Altaf Merchant. " A Ten Year Retrospective of Advertising Research Productivity, 1997-2006"
Journal of Advertising. Fall 2008.  Vol. 37,  Iss. 3,  p. 69-94 (26 pp.)

Given institutional accountability and ever-increasing pressure to gain recognition with high-quality research at the highest academic levels, objective performance benchmarks are needed to reward faculty, enhance institutional image, and attract needed funding. Two studies were undertaken to examine advertising scholarship for 1997-2006. The first study examined refereed publications in the top three U.S. advertising journals (Journal of Advertising, Journal of Advertising Research, and Journal of Current Issues and Research in Advertising), while the second study added a variety of other sources of advertising scholarship. A comprehensive picture of advertising scholarship is developed and suggestions for the discipline are provided. [PUBLICATION ABSTRACT]

Babin, Barry J.
"Scholarly Marketing Publication: the American Advantage? European Business Review, 2008. Vol. 20, Iss. 5, p. 370-383

Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to explore how much one's academic development and environment influence the way one performs, evaluates, writes and tries to publish basic, scholarly marketing research. Design/methodology/approach - A sample of results from initial journal submissions is used to empirically examine the potential reasons for rejection and the size and strength of main effects and interactions comprising the author's country of origin and the reviewer's country of origin. Findings - The findings, taken together, suggest a small but statistically significant advantage to US authors in avoiding rejection. This advantage is attributable to a relative superiority in expressing ideas in the English language and a better ability to logically develop theory. There is little evidence that suggests the advantage is due to a substantially more quantitative approach than that of others. Originality/value - The paper examines results of the review process from an actual sample of submitted papers and specifically addresses issues related to the "American" paradigm of marketing research.

Svensson, Goran, et al

"Scientific Identity of "Top" Research Journals in the Broader Discipline of Marketing:Findings and Queries," European Business Review, 2008. Vol. 20, Iss. 5, p. 384-400

Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to describe the "scientific identity" of the "top" research journals in the broader discipline of marketing by examining the methodological approaches and the geographical affiliations of authors published in selected journals. Design/methodology/approach - A sample of "top" research journals in marketing is selected on the basis of expert opinion and journal ranking lists. The selection includes the Journal of Consumer Research (JCR), Journal of Marketing (JM), Journal of Marketing Research (JMR), Journal of Retailing (JR), Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science (JAMS); and Marketing Science (MS). Findings - The "scientific identities" of JCR, JM, JMR, JR, JAMS and MS are revealed as being built on quantitative research designs and the North American paradigm of research values. In fact, all journals are US-based. None was found to be based on a mix of empirical research designs. The selected research journals were found to be narrowly focused, and the lack of variety of "scientific identities" among the journals studied here is discomfiting for the ongoing scientific knowledge building and theory generation in marketing. Research limitations/implications - Further studies of the "scientific identity" of individual research journals are desirable in other sub-disciplines of marketing. A series of questions have been raised that the authors argue are worthy of further attention and debate in the world-wide research community. Practical implications - Researchers will benefit from insights into the "scientific identities" of the "top" research journals in the broader discipline of marketing. In particular, researchers can note the particular feature of dogmatic narrowness of research designs that are present in all of these journals. Originality/value - The study delivers insights into the publishing requirements of "top" research journals in the broader discipline of marketing. It provides some challenging and discomfiting findings.

Polonsky, Michael Jay."Publishing on Publishing: Streams in the Literature," European Business Review. 2008. Vol. 20, Iss. 5, p. 401-420
Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to propose and examine streams in the literature related to academic publishing, with a focus on works in marketing. The content of the works within each theme are then explored to identify what issues have been examined and their implications. Design/methodology/approach - The paper is a literature review, drawing on 30 years of research on academic publishing in marketing. The review is designed to cover the underlying issues examined, but is not designed to be comprehensive in terms of all the works exploring each stream of research. Findings - There are five main streams in the literature focusing on: rankings; theory and knowledge development; how to publish;, criticisms of publishing; and other issues. Within each stream, a number of sub-areas are explored. The works tend to be fragmented and there is generally limited in-depth qualitative research within streams exploring the underlying assumptions on which publishing is based. Research limitations/implications - The focus of the research is on the streams of works, rather than the findings within each stream and future research could explore each of these streams and sub-streams in more detail. Generally, the works appear to becoming increasingly sophisticated in terms of their analysis, which is only possible with the new technologies available. New metrics proposed in the literature that can be used to better understand publishing and additional qualitative research exploring some of the basic assumptions could also be explored. Practical implications - The research suggests that some streams with regard to academic publishing may have reached saturation and future publishing in these areas will need to be innovative in its approach and analysis, if these works are to be published. Originality/value - This paper is the first attempt to develop streams within the literature on academic publishing in marketing and thus draws together a diverse cross-section of works. It provides suggestions for directions for future research in the various streams.

Polonsky, Michael J. & Paul Whitelaw, "What Are We Measuring When We Evaluate Journals?" Journal of Marketing Education, Vol.27, No.2, August 2005, p.189
This article undertakes two studies to examine issues related to journal rankings. Study 1 examines the consistency between journal rankings reported in past studies. It finds that while there is consistency when comparing these studies, this consistency does not always occur outside the top-ranked journals. Study 2 explores whether individuals believe that the weighting of four underlying evaluative criteria-that is, prestige, contribution to theory, contribution to practice, and contribution to teaching-vary, based on (1) whose criteria are used (individual or individuals' perception of their institutions weighting), (2) the geographic region in which the individuals teach (North America, Europe, and Asia-Pacific), and (3) whether or not an individual works at an institution offering a Ph.D./D.B.A. The results suggest that some differences in criteria weighting exist. Implications are discussed, with it being suggested that it may not be possible to develop a universally applicable set of journal rankings.

Bauerly, Ronald J. and Don T. Johnson (2005), "An Evaluation of Journals Used in Doctoral Marketing Programs," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 33(3), 313-329.
"Studies that rank the relative quality of scholarly marketing journals have relied primarily on expert opinion surveys and citation analyses. The authors use a new approach that combines elements of these two alternatives and compile a database of 6,294 citations (representing 3,423 different articles) from 109 syllabi obtained from a broad sampling of AACSB-International-accredited schools with marketing doctoral programs. The five most cited journals (Journal of Marketing, Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Marketing Research, Marketing Science, and Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science) account for 66.5 percent of citations in the syllabi. Rankings of journals other than the top five vary markedly from previous journal quality studies. Few articles are cited in common across programs, and the authors find considerable variation even within individual seminar types. The findings provide a new basis for assessing the quality of journals and provide new insights about the content of doctoral programs." [PUBLICATION ABSTRACT]

Lehman, Donald R. "Journal Evolution and the Development of Marketing", Journal of Public Policy and Marketing, Vol.24, No.1, Spring, 2005, p.137
"The main, original journals in marketing are Journal of Retailing (1925) and Journal of Marketing (1937). To an important extent, the field evolved from these progenitors. As Wilkie and Moore (2003) note, there was an explosion of new journals in the 1980s. This article considers the nature of the journals that have emerged in marketing and the order in which they were found to examine the pattern of growth in the field. This analysis includes only marketing journals. Thus, numerous outlets that publish marketing-related research are not included, such as Management Science, Journal of International Business Studies and Sloan Management Review. Although these journals have a major impact on the field, they are largely forums for work in other areas and thus do not provide an unconfounded reflection of trends in marketing."

Mort, Gillian Sullivan, Janet R. McColl-Kennedy, Geoffrey Kiel, and Geoffrey N. Soutar. 2004. "Australian and New Zealand Senior Academics' Perceptions of Marketing Journals", Australasian Marketing Journal 12 (2): 51-61.
"Increasingly, business schools are under pressure to produce quality outputs, including high quality international refereed journal publications. Understanding senior Australian and New Zealand marketing academics' views of journal quality is valuable to individual scholars and to the marketing discipline. This paper presents the findings of a study of such perceptions provided by senior academics in Australia and New Zealand. A survey containing a comprehensive list of 73 journals was sent to all professorial members of ANZMAC and Heads of Marketing Schools in Australia and New Zealand, with an overall response rate of 45%. Respondents rated the journals on a 5-point quality scale and means of ratings were used to establish overall rank. The results suggested that, while senior faculty in Australia and New Zealand have their own distinct perceptions of journal quality, these views are not inconsistent with international views. The implications of the results and directions for future research are discussed."

Polonksy, Michael J. "Journal Rankings: Does One Size Fit All?", Australasian Marketing Journal, Vol.12, No.2, p.64. 2004
"The question of ranking journals, institutions, individual academics and specific papers is regularly visited within business and management disciplines. The Mort et al paper allows individuals in Australia and New Zealand to have some idea of the perceptual rankings of journals by senior academics. As such, it communicates valuable information to those who might be evaluated by these senior academics. The question of whether this is how the research performance of all staff, across institutions and across levels within institutions, should be measured is something that needs to be considered in the future. Arguably, one size does not fit all."

Uncles, Mark D. "Journal Rankings: How Much Credence Should We Give Them?", Australasian Marketing Journal, Vol.12, No.2, p.67, 2004.
"Mort et al's (2004) list of top-tier marketing journals includes the Journal of Consumer Research (JCR), the Journal of Marketing (JM), the Journal of Marketing Research (JMR), the Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science (JAMS), and the International Journal of Research in Marketing (IJRM). This is not a surprising list. All these journals are strong, academically. But all journal rankings suffer from limitations and imperfections. Rigid and obsessive adherence to lists is for those with a bean-counting mentality, or for those who are unable to judge when a contribution to knowledge is being made and who feel they must instead fall back on a proxy measure. There are just too many limitations and imperfections for us to give too much credence to journal rankings, especially simple ones that fail to acknowledge the diversity of journal types and the different target audiences that most researchers are trying to reach."

Zinkhan, George M., "Accessing Academic Research Through an E-Database: Issues of Journal Quality and Knowledge Use," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, vol.32 no.4 (2004) pg.369-370

Heischmidt, Kenneth A. and Peter Gordon (1993), "Rating Marketing Publications: Impact of Accreditation and Publication History," Journal of Education for Business, Vol. 68, No. 3, pp. 152-158.

Baumgartner Hans,& Rik Pieters, "The Structural Influence of Marketing Journals: A Citation Analysis of the Discipline and its Subareas Over Time," Journal of Marketing. Chicago: Apr 2003. Vol. 67, Iss. 2; pg. 123..
(Available in paper at the Business Library).
"The authors investigate the overall and subarea influence of a comprehensive set of marketing and marketing-related journals at three points in time during a 30-year period using a citation-based measure of structural influence. The results show that a few journals wield a disproportionate amount of influence in the marketing journal network as a whole and that influential journals tend to derive their influence from many different journals. Different journals are most influential in different subareas of marketing; general business and managerially oriented journals have lost influence, whereas more specialized marketing journals have gained in influence over time. The Journal of Marketing emerges as the most influential marketing journal in the final period (1996-1997) and as the journal with the broadest span of influence across all subareas. Yet the Journal of Marketing is notably influential among applied marketing journals, which themselves are of lesser influence. The index of structural influence is significantly correlated with other objective and subjective measures of influence but least so with the impact factors reported in the Social Sciences Citation Index. Overall, the findings demonstrate the rapid maturation of the marketing discipline and the changing role of key journals in the process.

Cheng, Louis T.W., Kam C Chan, Ricky Y K Chan." Publications in Major Marketing Journals: An Analysis of Research Productivity of Asia-Pacific Universities, Journal of Marketing Education, Aug 2003. Vol. 25, Iss. 2; pg. 163.
(Ask for assistance in locating this journal)
"The authors examine the marketing research productivity of Asia-Pacific universities using a set of 20 marketing journals during 1991-2000. A weighted Journal of Marketing-equivalent page count is used to account for different font and page sizes of the journals, different lengths in articles, coauthorships, and affiliations. A total of 106 universities are evaluated. The top 3 universities are, in order, the University of New South Wales, the National University of Singapore, and Hong Kong University of Science and Technology. School history does not seem to relate to research productivity. Indeed, several prominent universities are not ranked as highly as other more recently established ones. In achieving publication, the degree of research emphasis and research strategy of a university might play a more important role than years of operation. A majority of the top 20 Asia-Pacific universities have made significant progress in research output during 1991-2000."

Easton, G., and D. M. Easton. 2003. "Marketing Journals and the Research Assessment Exercise". Journal of MarketingManagement 19 (1/2): 5-24.
"The publication of the 2001 UK HEFCE Research Exercise data provides an opportunity to examine the performance not only of Business and Management HE institutions but also the journals submitted by the research active marketing staff from those institutions. Two measures of journal performance are reported and analysed; frequency of submission and journal "quality". The latter was measured in terms of the concept of RAE Implied Journal Quality (RIJQ) using the link from a journal through the submitting author to the RAE rating of their institution. The frequency results indicate a high degree of publication concentration in the Journal of Marketing Management and the European Journal of Marketing. The RIJQ picture is quite different with US journals dominating the rankings. In both cases results are analysed in terms of possible explanatory factors and the role of the RIJQ as a measure of journal quality is critically assessed."

Helm, Amanda E., David Hunt, and Mark B. Houston. 2003. "Citation Frequency of Research Published in the Top Three Marketing Journals: Ranking the Impact of Articles, Scholars, and Institutions" 2003 AMA Summer Educators' Conference Proceedings, 198-208.

Shugan, Steven M. "Editiorial: Journal Rankings: Save the Outlets for Your Research," Marketing Science, Vol. 22, No.4, Fall 2003, p.437.
"Rankings of MBA programs by journalists have had a dramatic impact on business schools. Journal rankings impose a single dimension for evaluating journals that will inevitably hurt some journals. However, there are steps that researchers can take to keep their journals strong. Ten steps all researchers should take include: 1. Let your dean or superiors know at every opportunity that you and your colleagues read academic journals. 2. Subscribe to academic journals. 3. Obey the copyright laws. 4. Do not allow others to post your published papers on the web. 5. Join your professional organizations and be active. 6. Respect the research of other researchers. 7. Reward service. 8. Foster a culture of cooperation. 9. Foster a culture of respect. 10. Use research articles in your classroom teaching."

Hawes, Jon M., and Bruce Keillor. 2002. "Assessing Marketing Journals: A Mission-based Approach", Journal of the Academy of Business Education, 3 (2): 70-86.

Theoharakis, Vasilis, and Andrew Hirst. 2002. "Perceptual Differences of Marketing Journals: A Worldwide Perspective". Marketing Letters 13 (4): 389-402.
"The practice of evaluating faculty and business schools based on their journal publications has increased the emphasis on research output in peer reviewed journals. Since journal standings are a frequently debated issue, this study seeks to examine the perceptual differences of journals between different segments of marketing academics. Based on a worldwide online survey, journals are assessed in terms of four subjective quality metrics: journal familiarity, average rank position, percent of respondents who classify a journal as top tier, and readership. It is demonstrated that an individual's geographic origin, research interests or journal affiliation can have a significant impact on journal rankings."

Vasilis, Theoharakis, and Hirst, Andrew "Perceptual Differences of Marketing Journals: A Worldwide Perspective", Marketing Letters, 13:4 (Nov 2002).
"The practice of evaluating faculty and business schools based on their journal publications has increased the emphasis on research output in peer reviewed journals. Since journal standings are a frequently debated issue, this study seeks to examine the perceptual differences of journals between different segments of marketing academics. Based on a worldwide online survey, journals are assessed in terms of four subjective quality metrics: journal familiarity, average rank position, percent of respondents who classify a journal as top tier, and readership. It is demonstrated that an individual's geographic origin, research interests or journal affiliation can have a significant impact on journal rankings."

Bettencourt, Lance A., and Mark B. Houston. 2001," The Impact of Article Method Type and Subject Area on Article Citations and Reference Diversity in JM, JMR, and JCR", Marketing Letters 12 (4): 327-41.
"It has been argued that the scientific status of the marketing discipline is reflected in both the ability of its articles to be cited and the degree to which its articles draw from a diverse set of reference sources. We combine a content analysis of a sample of 561 JM, JMR, and JCR articles with a citation analysis and reference analysis of those same articles to investigate the impact of article method type and subject area on article citation rates and reference diversity. Our results reveal that verbal-theory and field study papers are both more likely to be cited and more likely to draw from a wide variety of journal and disciplinary reference sources. The results also reveal that services/customer satisfaction and general theory and philosophy of science articles are generally more likely to be cited than other subject areas, although services/customer satisfaction articles are also less likely to rely on a diverse set of references."

Bakir, Aysen, Scott J Vitell, Gregory M Rose, "Publications in Major Marketing Journals: An analysis of Scholars and Marketing Departments Journal of Marketing Education, Aug 2000. Vol. 22, Iss. 2; pg. 99. (Ask for assistance in locating this journal)
"A study examines the research productivity of marketing scholars and departments by examining published articles in six major marketing journals from 1991 to 1998. The research production of marketing departments according to faculty size is evaluated and a comparison is made with previous studies on the productivity of marketing departments."

Hetzel, Patrick. 2000. "Where are We Going? Perceptions of French Marketing Academics", Journal of Marketing Management 16 (7): 717-44.

Bettencourt, Lance A. & Mark B Houston."Reference Diversity in JCR, JM, and JMR: A Reexamination and Extension of Tellis, Chandy, and Ackerman (1999) Journal of Consumer Research, Sep. 2001. Vol. 28, Iss. 2; pg. 313.
"Results of a reference analysis led Tellis, Chandy, and Ackerman (1999) to conclude that Journal of Consumer Research (JCR) was not as diverse in its references as Journal of Marketing (JM) and Journal of Marketing Research (JMR). The Tellis et al. conclusions are reexamined with a reference analysis comparison of JCR, JM, and JMR from 1976 to 1995 using an expanded set of reference diversity indicators at the article level of analysis. Reexamination reveals small or nonsignificant differences among the journals in discipline and journal variety. The results also indicate that JCR articles are more likely to rely on sources that are more conceptually distant from marketing and business than are articles in JM or JMR, regardless of time period. The findings of Tellis et al. (1999) are extended with a test of the assumption of a positive relationship between reference diversity and subsequent article influence using all 228 articles appearing in JCR from 1991 to 1995.

Polonsky, Michael Jay Gary Jones, Megan J Kearsley, "Accessibility: An Alternative Method of Ranking Marketing Journals?"
Journal of Marketing Education, Dec 1999. Vol. 21, Iss. 3; pg. 181. (Ask for assistance in locating this journal)
"A study examines the ranking of marketing journals using Australian university library holdings, either in hard copy or full-text electronic format. It is found that the accessibility rankings differed significantly from the most recent US perceptual rankings, and it is suggested that in some situations, the accessibility rankings may be a more appropriate measure than other approaches. An examination of journal characteristics and their relationship to holdings in Australian university libraries was also undertaken. It was found that the year in which the journal started publication and its perceived importance within the US has a statistical impact on the proportion of Australian university libraries holding the journal."

Tellis, Gerald J, Rajesh K Chandy, David S Ackerman."In Search of Diversity: The Record of Major Marketing Journals ,"
JMR, Journal of Marketing Research,
Feb 1999. Vol. 36, Iss. 1; pg. 120.
"A study analyzes the publications of 4 major marketing journals on the basis of their diversity relative to each other, against their mission statements, and over time. One important finding is that the journals that make no claims to diversity tend to be quite diverse, while the one that strives to be diverse does not seem to achieve its goals. A 2nd major finding is that each of the 4 journals has a distinct character that is not necessarily the one intended by its mission or its editors. A 3rd major finding is that these patterns are generally stable over time and tend to persist even the face of efforts and pleas by its editors for change." [See Bettencourt above]

Zinkhan, George M., and Thomas W. Leigh. 1999. "Assessing the Quality Ranking of the Journal of Advertising. 1986-1997." Journal of Advertising 28 (2): 51-70.
"Recent attention has been paid to the use of citation analysis as an approach to examine relative journal quality and prestige, as well as the relative scholarly status of academic communities and disciplines. The fundamental notion is that citations are objective indicators of knowledge use by scholars and knowledge flows among academic communities. In that context, a study examines the journal quality ranking of the Journal of Advertising in relation to 33 marketing, advertising and business journals over the 1986-1997 time period. Results show that JA ranks respectably among specialty marketing, advertising and business journals, but, as expected, generally below the general marketing and business journals"

Henthorne, Tony L., Michael S. LaTour, and Tina Loraas. 1998. "Publication Productivity in Three Leading U.S. Advertising Journals: 1989 through 1996". Journal of Advertising 27 (2): 53-63.
"Periodic scanning of research productivity within a discipline is necessary to effectively measure the relative contribution of individual authors and institutions. This review extends Barry's 1990 work and examines refereed articles in the three primary US advertising specialty journals - Journal of Advertising Research, and Journal of Current Issues and Research in Advertising - for the period 1989 through 1996. The findings indicate a significant shift in individual and institutional rankings. Given recent pressures on academic institutions to show concrete evidence of performance, the findings provide a useful benchmark of individual and institutional research productivity within the three outlets."

Koojaroenprasit, Narong, Art Weinstein, William C. Johnson, and David O. Remington. 1998." Marketing Journal Rankings Revisited: Research Findings and Academic Implications", Marketing Education Review 8(1): 95-102.
"The purpose of this study is to update perceived quality rankings of leading academic marketing journals by sending questionnaires to chairpersons of marketing departments in AACSB accredited business schools. The latest top ten journal rankings are: 1) Journal of Consumer Research, 2) Journal of Marketing, 3) Journal of Marketing Research, 4) Marketing Science, 5) Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 6) Journal of Retailing, 7) Journal of Advertising Research, 8) Journal of Advertising, 9) Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, and 10) Journal of Macromarketing. This study builds on work by Browne and Becker and Luke and Doke and offers important implications for marketing scholarship."

Hult, G.T.M., Neese, W.T. and Bashaw, R.E., "Faculty Perceptions of Marketing Journals," Journal of Marketing Education, 19:1 (Spring 1997): 37-52. (Ask for assistance in locating this journal)
"The objective of the study was to rank marketing journals based on their importance in disseminating scholarly marketing knowledge. Two indices were used to rank the journals: (1) importance/prestige index and (2) popularity/familiarity index. To be included on the ranking list, a journal had to be ranked by at least 5% of the number of respondents that ranked the top journal in the field. A stratified sample of 1,000 marketing academicians at the assistant, associate, and full professor levels was used to compile the rankings. In addition, two samples of 500 academicians each were used to validate the initial results using different ranking methods. The complete study includes rankings pertaining to the overall sample and also segmented samples (i.e., doctoral, non-doctoral, AACSB accredited, and non-AACSB accredited institutions). (Ask for assistance)

Browne, William G., and Boris W. Becker. 1991. "A Longitudinal Study of Marketing Journal Familiarity and Quality". 1991 Summer American Marketing Association Educators Conference, 702-10.

Ganesh, G. K., Chandy, P. R., Henderson, G. V."Awareness and Evaluation of Selected Marketing Journals Inside and Outside the Discipline: An Empirical Study," Akron Business and Economic Review, Winter 1990. Vol. 21, Iss. 4; pg. 93
"Very little is known about the awareness and evaluations of marketing journals outside the marketing discipline. However, researchers outside the area often are members of promotion and tenure committees that make these decisions. A mail survey was used to find out the impressions of researchers inside and outside the marketing discipline about various marketing journals. Based on the responses of 474 researchers who had published in top journals in their fields, the results indicate that both awareness and evaluation of 8 marketing journals are significantly higher inside than outside the discipline of marketing. This finding applies to individual journals as well as to the 8 taken as a group. One interpretation of this finding is that nonmarketing researchers think poorly of the quality of research in marketing compared with their own

Laverie, Debra A., Murphy, Patrick E., "The Marketing and Public Policy Literature: A Look at the Past Ten Years", Journal of Public Policy and Marketing, 12:2 (Fall 1993): 258.
"The public policy literature in marketing during the 1980s and early 1990s are examined. The present time may be ripe for another wave of public policy development. In the 1980s, the US witnessed a drawing back of government regulation during the Reagan and Bush administrations. The perceived excesses of government regulation in the 1970s led to what is called the "Reagan revolution," in which the federal government and its agencies were viewed as intrusive to business operations. The scaling back of government during the 1980s, especially at agencies such as the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), is well documented. The articles examined are classified using a 3-part framework: conceptual, methodological, and substantive. The study analyzed work published in the Journal of Public Policy & Marketing (JPP&M) and other major marketing journals. The future of public policy research seems promising. JPP&M is the main source of knowledge development in this area."

Pecotich, Anthony. and Everett. James. E., and Jobber, David., and Simpson, Paul. "An Extension of the Citation Analysis of Selected Marketing Journals" International Journal of Research in Marketing, 6:3 (1989): 199-205. (Available in the Business Library and on ScholarsPortal)
"The citation analysis of selected marketing journals by Jobber and Simpson (1988) is extended using loglinear and multidimensional scaling techniques to produce a map of the relative configuration of the journals and a measure of their importance. The re-analysis of the Jobber and Simpson data largely reconfirms their findings. The measure of importance used, or the degree to which a journal is cited by others, is greatly influenced by the cumulative number of articles that the journal produced over its lifetime. Thus, longer established journals will tend to score higher on importance. As expected, the dominance of the American journals is confirmed. Despite the labor of the task, a complete enumeration of the citation matrix is needed. Jobber and Simpson agree that the task of citation analysis within the domain of marketing will be less labor intensive as the Social Sciences Citation Index becomes more complete"

Jobber, David. and Simpson, Paul., "A Citation Analysis of Selected Marketing Journals,"International Journal of Research in Marketing, 5:2 (1988): 138.
"Citation analysis is one way to assess the quality of a journal in a discipline. Over 8,000 citations are analyzed to determine the frequency of use of a selection of US and European marketing journals. The results of the citation analysis reveal a wide variability in the frequency with which marketing journals are cited. The pre-eminence of US journals is demonstrated by the fact that they take 8 out of the top 10 positions. An analysis of marketing citations by general business journals indicates that research published in marketing journals is having a beneficial impact on wider business issues, such as strategic management and international business. The analysis of citation patterns with base subjects, such as economics and psychology, revealed a heavy dependence upon them."

Luke, R.H. and Doke, E.R., "Marketing Journal Hierarchies: Faculty Perceptions, 1986-1987" Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 15:1 (Spring 1987): 74-78. (Available on microfilm)
"To ascertain the perceptions among American Assembly of Collegiate Schools of Business (AACSB) school professionals in the field of marketing regarding journal hierarchies, survey packages were mailed to 243 Deans of Business Schools listed in the 1985-1986 AACSB Membership Directory. Completed packets were returned by 35 institutions with usable questionnaires from 108 faculty. Respondents were asked to list the top 10 publishing journals for marketing faculty from a list of 30. They also were encouraged to write-in journals not on the original list but considered important enough to be included in the top 10. The popularity and familiarity of the journal and its perceived importance or prestige to marketing faculty publishing activity were examined. A popularity-familiarity (PF) and an importance-prestige (IP) index were computed for each journal. Results suggest that IP is a stronger and perhaps more reliable indicator of overall journal quality than PF. However, this assumption requires some minimum level of PF. The relative high rankings given to generic journals such as the Harvard Business Review and Business Horizons were somewhat startling."

Clark, Gary L. "Productivity Ratings of Institutions Based on Publication in Eight Marketing Journals: 1983-1984, Journal of Marketing Education, Vol.7, No.3, pp.12-23
"Institutions are ranked based on the number of publications produced by each school's faculty in eight marketing journals. The 423 articles analyzed were produced by 621 different individuals employed at 60 different businesses and 196 different academic institutions. The vast majority of individuals (85 percent) were credited with having authored or co-authored only one article during the time period used for the analysis."


Barnes, S.J. "Assessing the Value of IS Journals" (2005) Communications of the ACM, 48 (1), pp. 110-112. Cited 1 time.
The influence and impact of a variety of journals publishing information system (IS) research is determined using journal citation reports. The data suggests there is consistency in several of the top-rated journals, but wide variety in others. Some IS journal appear to have rankings that contradict their 'true' value to other researchers. For some of the best journals, the ranking is relatively consistent, which is comforting, but for some of the mid-ranked journals the picture is not very clear.

Chapman, Karen & Paul Brothers, " A Reference Study of Leading MIS Journals: Indentifying Formats, Frequency, and Journal Subjects," Journal of Business & Finance Librarianship, Vol.10, No.2, 2004, p.17.
This study is a refernce study of three leading MIS journals, Information Systems Research, Journal of Management Information Systems and MIS Quarterly. References from the articles published during the period 2000-2002 were gathered and analyzed to determine the formats of the resources. About 65% of the citations were to journal articles and about 25% to books or chapters. The references to journal articles were further analyzed by date and subject of the journal. About 93% of the journal articles were published since 1980, and management was the most frequent journal subject."

Katerattanakul, Pairin and Bernard Han and Alan Rea ." Is information systems a reference discipline?" Association for Computing Machinery. Communications of the ACM . Vol. 49, Iss. 5, p. 114-118 May 2006
No published literature has examined knowledge con-tributions of IS research to other disciplines. Thus, to provide more objective evidence in support of this new perception, the authors conducted research using citation analysis to examine how frequently the articles published in major IS journals are cited by publications in other disciplines. This study employs citation analysis to examine the contributions of IS knowledge where and how often it is cited. Results from this study provide strong evidence that the IS discipline has become a reference discipline for others. That is, IS research published in IS journals is frequently cited by other disciplines, even those fields that previously served as reference disciplines for IS (such as computer science, management, and organization science). The frequent citations made from other disciplines to IS research also suggest that IS research contributes to advancing the body of scientific knowledgeas the intended purpose of publications in academic journals is to impart knowledge to others, furthering the advancement of scientific achievements.

Rainer, R. Kelly jr. & Mark D. Miller, "Examining Differences Across Journal Rankings,Association for Computing Machinery. Communications of the ACM., Vol. 48, No.2, Feb. 2005.
Many have studied and ranked the quality of computing journals over the last 15 years. This composite of the top 50 was created by examining how those rankings fared over time and across studies.

Lowry, Paul Benjamin, Romans, Denton & Curtis, Aaron.
Global Journal Prestige and Supporting Disciplines: A Scientometric Study of Information Systems Journals" Journal of the Association for Information Systems, Vol. 5 No. 2 (2004) pp.29-77

AbstractMany argue that the information Systems (IS) field is at a critical juncture in its evolving identity. In debating whether the IS field is in crisis, we argue with Hirschheim and Klein (2003) that "reflective analysis" will contribute to the field's continued prosperity. Indeed, reflective analysis is needed to evaluate the journals of the field as well as IS journal rankings, which evaluate the effectiveness and productivity of researchers and the effectiveness and productivity of journals in communicating research results. After all, where and how we publish are fundamental aspects of the identity of the IS field-reflecting our value systems, paradigms, cultural practices, reward systems, political hierarchy, and aspirations.This article reviews the results of the largest global, scientometric survey to date of IS journal rankings that targeted 8741 faculty from 414 IS departments world-wide, and resulted in 2559 responses, or a 32% response rate. Rather than using predetermined journal lists, the study required respondents to freely recall their top-four research journals.

This research improves on the usual scientometric journal ranking studies by providing a foundation for further reflection and self-analysis. For instance, it first examines the global structure of the IS field and investigates perceptions among global IS academics concerning current research outlets. Specific results then illustrate the values and cultural norms in the global IS community that affect the evaluation of research and publication outlets. Finally, in addition to rankings of scholarly journals by the entire world-wide sample of IS academics, rankings are provided for top IS practitioner journals, most frequently read IS journals, top journals for the major IS supporting disciplines and top journals by world region.

Koh, Chang E, "IS journal review process: a survey on IS research practices and journal review issues " Information Management. September 2003. Vol. 40, Iss. 8; pg.743-756
" Journal publication is an important indicator of research productivity for individual researchers as well as academic institutions. It is also a contentious issue as various stakeholders have different and often conflicting interests and perspectives. This study explores how IS researchers view journal review and publication process based on their professional status, institutional mission, and role orientation. It also investigates publication practices of IS researchers, such as frequency of article submissions, acceptance/rejection rates, number of revisions required before publication, and publication outlets. "

Peffers, Ken , Tang Ya. "Identifying and Evaluating the Universe of Outlets for Information Systems Research: Ranking the Journals,"JITTA : Journal of Information Technology Theory and Application. 2003. Vol. 5, Iss. 1; pg. 63
"We use a survey instrument to identify the universe of journal publication outlets for information systems (IS) research, to identify the IS journals, and to observe the value of the outlets to IS researchers. In an online survey we asked IS researchers to rate the value of IS publication outlets and to categorize them into IS journals, allied discipline journals, and professional and managerial magazines and journals. 1129 validated and non-duplicate respondents rated 326 journals, which we present in three rank-ordered lists, one for each of IS journals, allied discipline journals, and professional and managerial magazines and journals. In addition, we graphically present trends in the ranking of five selected journals from 1991 through 2003. This is the first attempt to identify the universe of IS journal publishing outlets, the first to rank the value of IS journals separately, and the first attempt to rank the value of IS publication outlets without pre-selecting the set of journals to be ranked."

Mylonopoulos, Nikolaos A. & Vasilis Theoharakis, "Global Perceptions of IS Journals,"
Association for Computing Machinery. Communications of the ACM, Sep 2001. Vol. 44, Iss. 9; p. 29
"Increasingly, academics and institutions all over the world place significant importance to journal rankings for promotion, tenure, and assessment purposes. Survey results are reported that contribute to the general interest in journal ranking. There is substantial research evidence that academics form different regions of the world have different research approaches. Differences between Europe, North America, and Australasia have been identified in terms of characteristic discrepancies in popularity, position, percent top 10 and readership. The undisputed leading journals in the world are MISQ, Communications, and ISR. The study's key finding is that perceived journal quality is a multifaceted concept, the assessment of which may vary considerably depending on the measurement approach and the subjective regional stance one chooses to adopt."

Walstrom, Kent A. & Bill C Hardgrave "Forums for information systems scholars: III," Information & Management, Dec. 2001. Vol. 39, Iss. 2; pg. 117. (Available on ScholarsPortal)
"Three hundred and sixty-four information systems faculty responded to a questionnaire rating 51 journals and 13 conferences associated with the information systems field. In addition to rating the value of the outlets, faculty were asked to state whether a journal was published primarily to disseminate information systems research or not. Relative rankings for each journal and conference were determined. As the third in a series of studies, comparisons were made between these findings and those of previous ones. The overall stability in the rankings of journals and conferences was also identified. A few journals and conferences were rated and ranked for the first time. Furthermore, a significant increase in the ratings of pure information systems journals was noted."

Michael Whitman, Anthony Hendrickson and Anthony Townsend , "Research Commentary. Academic Rewards for Teaching, Research and service: Data and Discourse,"Information Systems Research, June 1999, vol. 10, no. 2, 99-109) report the rankings of 80 publications for their value in reviews of research and performance based of the survey of 112 AACSB accredited institutions.

Cheng, C.H., Kumar, A., Motwani, J., Reisman, A., and M. Madan, (1999) "An Objective Rank-Order Analysis of the Technology Innovation Management Journals", IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, February 46(1) 4-13

Cheng C.H., Kumar, A. Motwani, J. Reisman, A. and M. Madan, (1997), "Technology Management Journals: An Analysis of Citations" Proceedings of PICMET '97, Portland International Conference on Management of Engineering and Technology, Portland State University, Engineering Management Program. pp. 143-144

Walstrom, K.A.,& Hardgrave, B.C. "Forums for Management Information Systems Scholars: Update," Communications of the ACM, 40:11 (November 1997): 119-124.
"A follow-up to a 1991 study was undertaken to determine the perceptions of MIS faculty regarding the quality of journals and conferences as publication outlets. MIS faculty were asked to rate journals with regard to their appropriateness for MIS publication and rate conferences based on their value to the MIS field. Overall results indicate that the top 4 journals in MIS are MIS Quarterly, Information Systems Research, Management Science and Communications of the ACM. The top conference is the International Conference on Information Systems. Comparison with the results from 1991 reveals relative stability of the ranking of the top-10 journals, although the top 2 journals now appear to be pure MIS."

Nord, Jeretta Horna; Nord, G. Daryl, "MIS Research: Journal Status Assessment and Analysis," Information & Management, Vol: 29, Issue: 1, July, 1995, p..29 (Available on ScholarsPortal)
"The perceived status of journals in which MIS research is published is an important issue to academics. The number of IS-related journals has increased through the years, yet it is not obvious which are the "leading" journals or what criteria should be used to determine this. This article addresses these issues by: (1) evaluating and analyzing previous studies in which MIS related journals have been ranked; (2) determining top-ranked journals and placing them into two levels, or tiers, based on previous studies; and (3) establishing a profile, through a systematic analysis, of the nine journals in the first tier. This study identified 17 highly ranked journals for publication. Nine were placed in the first tier and eight in the second tier. In addition to IS-specific journals, publications included management science, computer science, and business-oriented journals".

Walstrom, Kent A, Hardgrave, Bill C, Wilson, Rick L. "Forums for Management Information Systems Scholars,"
Communications of the ACM.,Mar 1995. Vol. 38, Iss. 3; pg. 93.
"A discussion is presented of scholarly research and determining which publication outlets are considered best. Many constituents have a definite interest in the determination of the relevance of publication outlets in a particular discipline. A study was undertaken to determine the important publishing journals and other outlets for management information systems (MIS) faculty. The MIS faculty were viewed as expert consumers of MIS research. In particular, 3 dimensions of each expert's background were considered important: 1. the expert's education, 2. the expert's role orientation, and 3. the expert's academic life-style. The impact of these dimensions was studied to determine their influence on MIS faculty perception of publishing journals. The top rated journals appear to be MIS Quarterly,Communications of the ACM,Information Systems Research, and Management Science."

Holsapple, C.W., Johnson, L.E., Manakyan, H., and Tanner, J., "Business Computing Research Journals: A Normalized Citation Analysis," Journal of Management Information Systems, 11:1 (Summer 1994): 131-140.
"A number of studies have been done that rank the relative importance of journals publishing management information systems (MIS) research. However, the study of business computing systems has grown to include not only MISs, but other business computing systems as well - for example, decision support systems and business expert systems. In a recent study, journals publishing business computing system research were ranked using a citation analysis methodology. That study is extended by taking into account the number of years each journal has been published. The normalized ranking scheme is compared with the original ranking. It is shown that more journals made "large" moves up than made "large" moves down. Coupling the largest positive differential and the largest negative differential, the greatest relative shift in ranks between any pair of journals was 27 places."

Cooper, Blair and Pao. 1993, 'Communicating MIS Research: A Citation Study of Journal Influence', Information Processing & Management, vol.29, no.1, pp. 113-127.
"If a stable core of highly influential journals exists, then its identification and the ranking of its members in terms of research influence is important for funding university schools and departments; for faculty promotion, tenure, and salaries; and for awarding research grants. Using researchers' perceptions of journal influence, publishing patterns of top management information systems (MIS) publishing universities, and citation analysis from prior research, it is found that a stable core of influential MIS journals does exist. The 5 core journals, ranked in order of influence, are found to be: 1. Management Science, 2. MIS Quarterly, 3. Communications of the ACM, 4. Sloan Management Review, and 5. Data Base. The top-ranked journal is 5 times more influential than the 2 lowest ranked journals, while the 2nd and 3rd ranked journals are at least 3 times as influential as the 2 lowest ranked journals.

Lending, D. & Wetherbe, J. C. 1992, 'Update on MIS research; A Profile of Leading Journals and US Universities', Data Base, vol. 23, no. 23, pp. 5-11. (Available in the Taylor Library).

Gillenson, M. and Stultz, Joel., "Academic Issues in MIS: Journals and Books", MIS Quarterly, 15:4 (1991): 449.
"The range of journals in which scholarly papers in the management information systems (MIS) field have been published has expanded over the years. The perceived ranking of the journals by those in the field is an important issue to academics. Another question of importance to academic personnel in the MIS field is whether the writing of books counts toward tenure and promotion. In late 1989 and early 1990, a survey of MIS professors in AACSB accredited business schools was conducted to address these 2 issues. The survey found that the most highly regarded journals for IS research include an assortment of IS-specific, computer science, and management science journals. This continues a long tradition, despite the introduction of several new IS journals. The results also indicate that books are generally counted toward tenure and promotion."

Boyer, G. and Carlson, G. 1989, 'Characteristics of Periodical Literature for the Potential Reader or Author in Information Management', MIS Quarterly, vol.13, no.2, pp. 221-229. (Available on JSTOR)
"Currently, none of the automated reference systems, periodical indexes, or other library indexing schemes provides a single source of accessing the variety of periodicals and journals that encompass the entire area of information management. Both readers and potential authors could benefit from such a source. In a study, over 200 different publications were identified as having articles that could be of importance to an information manager or user. Of the approximately 200 publications contacted, 110 were included in the final analysis. Some of the implications that emerged are: 1. Large variations exist in circulation numbers between academic journals and other classifications. 2. Academic authors wanting to have articles published may have a more difficult time doing so than most people think. 3. The higher the circulation rate, the lower the subscription price."

Doke, E. R. & Luke, R. H. 1987, 'Perceived Quality of CIS/MIS Journals Among Faculty: Publishing Hierarchies', Journal of Computer Information Systems, vol. 28, no. 4, pp. 30-33. (Ask for Assistance)

Culnan, M. 1986, 'The Intellectual Development of Management Information Systems, 1972-1982: A co-citation analysis', Management Science, vol. 32, no. 2, pp. 156-172. (Available in paper at the Business Library or on JSTOR)
"An attempt is made to document the intellectual development of the ideas represented by published research in management information systems (MIS) based on an author cocitation analysis. Data were gathered from the Social Sciences Citation Index online. Nine invisible colleges of research are discovered. These 9 empirically defined conceptual groups collectively define the intellectual base of MIS, as well as the forces currently shaping MIS research. Four of the clusters represent early MIS research themes that are still popular, based on later citation patterns. Despite the centrality of the concept of the organization to widely accepted definitions of MIS, the results indicate that MIS research is not well-grounded in organization theory or have MIS research results been widely diffused in the organizational literature."

Culnan, M. J. & Swanson, E. B. 1986, 'Research in Management Information Systems, 1980-1984: Points of work and reference', MIS Quarterly, vol. 10, no. 3, pp. 289-301. (Available on JSTOR)
"Examination is given to the progress of management information systems (MIS) as a scholarly field of study since 1980. MIS is identified as emerging from a supporting base of 3 foundational fields: 1. computer science, 2. management science, and 3. organizational science. Hypotheses associated with this emergence are tested by an analysis of data on 271 MIS articles published during the period 1980-1984 in 6 academic journals and one conference proceeding. Each article is described by its work point -- the field of study represented by the publication in which the article appears -- and its reference point -- the distribution of the article's publication citations. Results of this analysis support the proposition that MIS is emerging as a separate field of study, with its own cumulative tradition."

Vogel D. R. & Wetherbe, J. C. 1984, 'MIS research: A profile of leading journals and universities', Data Base, vol. 16, no. 1, pp. 3-14.

Production/Operations Management

Maloni, Michael; Carter, Craig R; Kaufmann, Lutz.
“Author Affiliation in Supply Chain Management and Logistics journals: 2008-2010,” International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management 42. 1 (2012): 83-101.
Purpose - The purpose of this study is to extend a series of studies dating back to 1967 that evaluates faculty publication productivity in refereed supply chain management and logistics journals. Design/methodology/approach - Publication output and rankings of academic institutions are based on publication data from six supply chain management and logistics journals from 2008 through 2010. The results are compared to prior studies to identify trends and changes in the rankings. The authors also assess author collaboration influences as well as authorship diversity. Finally, the authors examine further changes to the core set of journals considered for future iterations of this study. Findings - The results indicate that supply chain management and logistics authorship continues to be dynamic. Several schools entered the top 25 ranking for the first time and others substantially improved their rankings. While higher-ranked schools engage in more collaboration within their own institutions, they practice less external and international collaboration. Additionally, the diversity of both individual authors and schools continues to expand, though evidence also suggests some level of emerging stability in sources of authorship. Research limitations/implications - As limitations, the selected journal set may present bias against some authors and institutions, particularly those from outside North America and those choosing to publish in other journals in the field or in related fields. Originality/value - This research stream enables authors and universities to judge their relative productivity of academic scholarship in the supply chain management and logistics field. Moreover, the longitudinal analysis provides insight into the evolving maturity of the field itself.

Ellinger, Alexander E; Chapman, Karen.
“Benchmarking Leading Supply Chain Management and Logistics Strategy Journals.  International Journal of Logistics Management 22. 3 (2011): 403-419.
Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to compare the performance of the supply chain management and logistics (SCML) strategy journals recently added to the Web of Science database to the performance of journals from other business disciplines also recently admitted to the Web of Science database on the Thomson Reuters selection process criteria. Design/methodology/approach - A benchmarking approach is used to examine the relative performance of SCML journals over a two-year period. Findings - The two sets of journals' publishing standards and the number of citations for authors from the two groups are quite similar. Journals in the benchmark group had greater international diversity and balance among their authors, editors and editorial boards, while the SCML journals were cited more often in Web of Science and had lower self-citation rates. Research limitations/implications - This study required a great deal of counting, and some of the data were collected multiple times to check for accuracy. Still, it is possible that mistakes were made. Data from different years and different authors may have yielded different results. Practical implications - The recent addition of six journals to the Web of Science database allows leading SCML journals to compete on a level playing field with other top-tier business journals and can therefore be regarded as a major step forward in the maturation of the discipline, as well as recognition of the quality of the journals. Originality/value - The authors' benchmarking study extends previous examinations of SCML journals relative to leading journals in other business fields, and offers direction for how SCML researchers and journal editors can continue to contribute to the maturation of the discipline.

Xu, Zhou; Cheang, Brenda; Lim, Andrew; Wen, Qi.
“Evaluating OR/MS Journals via PageRank,”  Interfaces 41. 4  (Jul/Aug 2011): 375-388,406-408.
Scholars, practitioners, and students in operations research and management science (OR/MS) often hesitate to use traditional approaches to evaluate journal quality because of the inconsistency of these approaches to perceptions and other associated biases. We introduce an alternative approach, which is based on Google's PageRank, to evaluate 31 OR/MS journals. This approach enhances the impact factor method by considering both citation quantity and quality. When we apply our method to OR/MS journals, the results match survey opinions and significantly outperform rankings based on impact factors. In addition, we provide an extensive discussion of other methods that have been used to assess journal quality. Compared to these methods, our method is better able to discern quality differences for journals that are perceived to be of relatively higher quality. Most importantly, we integrate our method into a Web-based journal-ranking system.

Petersen, Charles G; Aase, Gerald R; Heiser, Daniel R.
“Journal Ranking Analyses of Operations Management Research,”
International Journal of Operations & Production Management 31. 4  (2011): 405-422.
Purpose - Several published studies have ranked journals based on perceived quality according to operations management (OM) researchers. The purpose of this paper is to examine the ranking of journals for OM research using meta analysis. Design/methodology/approach - The study begins by using a meta-analysis approach to combine results of five recent OM journal ranking studies. A new citation analysis using OM research articles published in International Journal of Operations & Production Management, Journal of Operations Management, and Production and Operations Management between 1999 and 2005 is presented. Findings - Results of the meta-analysis and the citation analysis have many similarities, but there are some striking differences suggesting the evolution of OM research away from operations research and engineering. The results also illustrate the diversity of OM research ranging from analytical modeling to empirical studies influenced by other business disciplines and the behavioral sciences. Originality/value - This is the first time meta-analysis has been used to examine the ranking of journals for OM research. This research also provides a current citation analysis of the OM field for the first time in over a decade. While the results of these two analyses show some similarities with many of the same journals, there are some marked differences that may support the notion of an evolving OM field.

Agrawal, Vijay K; Agrawal, Vipin; Rungtusanatham, M.
“Theoretical and Interpretation Challenges to Using the Author Affiliation Index Method to Rank Journals,” Production and Operations Management 20. 2  (Mar/Apr 2011): 280-IX.
We formally review the Author Affiliation Index (AAI) method as originally conceived by David Harless and Robert J. Reilly from the Economics Department at the Virginia Commonwealth University School of Business and as subsequently developed and interpreted by Gorman and Kanet in their 2005 article. Through this formal review, we first highlight and discuss two important informational inputs that can impact the stability of the AAI scores for journals in any given set of to-be-evaluated journals. We then identify and challenge interpretations related to these scores (one theoretical, one statistical) offered by Gorman and Kanet that result in misleading conclusions about journal quality and that may potentially motivate inappropriate editorial behavior. For important professional decisions of hiring, performance evaluation, promotion, and tenure, we conclude by cautioning against sole reliance on the AAI method for ranking journals and against exclusive interpretation of the score computed via the AAI method as an indicator of journal quality.

Olson, J.E. "Top-25-Business-School Professors Rate Journals in Operations Management and Related Fields" (2005) Interfaces, 35 (4), pp. 323-338.
I obtained quality ratings and rankings of 39 journals in operations management and related disciplines through surveys of faculty members at top-25 US business schools in 2000 and in 2002. I also computed five-year impact factors for 29 of these journals and developed a ranking based on these impact factors. I found evidence of some change in journal quality ratings over the two-year period. Ratings also differed by research area but not by professorial level. In addition, I ranked the journals based on the number of academics who rated their quality, calling this a visibility measure. Finally, I compared my ratings to ratings in earlier survey and citation studies. The quality ratings were more consistent than the citation ratings.

Gorman, Michael; Kamet, J. "Evaluating Operations Management Related Journals via the Author Affiliation Index," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, Vol.7, No.1 (Winter 2005): p. 3
We evaluate operations management-related journals based on a novel indicator of journal quality - the Author Affiliation Index (AAI). We explain the basic rationale behind the AAI, as well as its advantages and disadvantages with respect to other such indicators of journal quality. We provide a specific recipe for its calculation and apply it to 27 journals in which researchers in the field of operations management might wish to publish. We compare the resulting journal rankings to those from published survey reports and citation analyses and test AAI for sensitivity to its inputs. We find the rankings from AAI to be consistent with other studies and to be robust with respect to changes in inputs.

Sodhi, Manmohan. "Journal Rankings: U.K. Perspective," OR-MS Today, Apr. 2005. Vol.32, No.2, p.14
Every 6 years or so UK universities take stock of their research publications in quality journals in response to the UK government-led "research assessment exercise". The process for the exercise involves taking the top 4 publications of each faculty member in the group published since the last exercise and giving each publication a rating on a scale of 1 to 4. This can also be thought of as A, B, C, D, etc, as well. Predictably, Management Science is in the A list, along with Mathematical Programming and Systems Control Letters. But the highest rating is that of the Journal of Operations Management. JOM has much more impact than any other OR/MS journal. One reason could be that JOM requires articles to be about companies or industries. Management Science opening the doors to all fields of management and Operations Research further narrowing to mathematical development means operations researchers are left struggling to figure out the boundaries of OR.

Agrawal. Vijay K, "Constituencies of Journals in Production and Operations Management:Implications on Reach and Quality," Production and Operations Management, Summer 2002. Vol. 11, Iss. 2; pg. 101.
"The contributions made by members of the following constituencies were analyzed in terms of the number of articles published: 1. the top 20 US business schools and the top 7 non-US business schools, 2. business and government organizations, 3. US business schools ranked between 21 and 50, 4. non-US business schools not included above, and 5. US business schools not included above.
Authors from the schools with top 10 programs in production and operations management contributed 20.2% of the articles published in POM and 3.5% of the articles published in JOM during 1997-2001. They contributed 24.6% of the articles in the 8 issues of M&SOM. The findings reported in this paper reflect the reach of 3 journals and the perceptions of various constituencies regarding journal quality. The findings about POM and JOM have a very high degree of validity because both journals are more than 10 years old and have well-established constituencies. The conclusions about the M&SOM constituencies are tentative because it is about 3 years old, and it is still developing its constituencies."

Vastag, Gyula & Frank Montabon. "Journal Characteristics, Rankings and Social Acculturation in Operations Management,"
Apr 2002. Vol. 30, Iss. 2; pg. 109. (Available in ScholarsPortal)
"Over the past 15 years, there have been several attempts in operations management to rate journals, authors and schools based on their research productivity and quality. While many of these have been very helpful in generating a relative ranking of productivity and prestige, these analyses seem incomplete in many ways. Most notably, they neglected the fact that these rankings are loaded with value judgments acquired in the process of academic acculturation on one hand and that they did not provide basic information about the journals on the other. This paper argues that the rankings reflect the milieu in which they were conceived and calls for usage-based measures as more appropriate ways of measuring a publication's impact through influencing and changing the thinking and actions of researchers, students and practitioners."

Goh, Chon-Huat, Holsapple, Clyde W., Johnson, Linda Ellis, Tanner, John R., "Evaluating and Classifying POM Journals", Journal of Operations Management, 15:2 (May 1997): 123-138. (Available in Business Library and on ScholarsPortal)
"A multitude of journals impact the production and operations management (POM) discipline. POM researchers, practitioners, and students all need objective means of rating these journals' impacts on the field. By applying an established multifaceted citation-based methodology, journals are assigned to categories (elite and major) along each of 4 dimensions (breadth, consistency, trend, and intensity of recognition) and subsequently organized into distinct tiers of importance to the production and operations management field. The data consist of 13,992 periodical citations that appeared in 3 prominent POM journals over a recent 5-year period."

Goh, C H, Holsapple, C W, Johnson, L E, Tanner, J. "An Empirical Assessment of Influences on POM Research
Omega. Jun 1996. Vol. 24, Iss. 3; pg. 337. (Available in paper at the Business Library and on ScholarsPortal)
"Researchers in the field of production and operations management, and those who evaluate them, need a clear, up-to-date picture of forums available for scholarly discourse in the field. Yet the literature contains no recent, large-scale, objective study of such publishing forums. The results of such a study are presented. A citation analysis methodology is employed to examine citation trends for books, proceedings and journals, and to determine a relative ranking of journals influencing POM research. Results of a previously reported subjective journal ranking were used to determine 5 base journals for the citation analysis. The data collection effort produced over 30,000 citations for the years 1989-1993. The journal rankings generated are compared with those of the earlier subjective studies in the POM field."

Vokurka, R.J., "The Relative Importance of Journals Used in Operations Management Research A Citation Analysis," Journal of Operations Management, 14:4 (Nov. 1996): 345-355. (Available in Business Library and on ScholarsPortal)
"Journal rankings are important for a variety of reasons, most importantly as the basis of academic tenure and promotion decisions. A common approach in other fields is the citations methodology which is used to determine the relative importance of various operations management (OM) journals. The citations analysis noted the frequency that all other journals are cited in Decision Sciences, Journal of Operations Management, and Management Science during the period 1992 to 1994. Rankings are provided based on total citations, citations per article, and citations per words published. It is shown that the journals with the most importance to OM research are Management Science, Decisions Sciences and Operations Research. Other journals important to OM research are the Harvard Business Review, Journal of Operations Management, and IIE Transactions."

Holsapple, Clyde W., Johnson, Linda Ellis, Manakyan, Herman, Tanner, John., "An Empirical Assessment and Categorization of Journals Relevant to DSS Research", Decision Support Systems, 14:4 (Aug 1995): 359-367. (Available in Business Library and ScholarsPortal)
"An objective empirical study of the decision support system (DSS) literature is made for the purpose of assessing journals relevant to DSS research efforts. DSS researchers and those who evaluate them are provided with an up-to-date picture of the forums available for scholarly discourse and research. A citation analysis is conducted of the Decision Support Systems journal for the years 1985-1993 to obtain a citation base containing over 7,500 citations. The citation base is then used to: 1. examine citation trends for books, proceedings, and journals, 2. determine a relative ranking of journals based on total citations, and 3. organize journals into categories. Guidelines are provided for utilizing the categorization." (Available in paper at the Business Library and on ScholarsPortal)

Reisman, A. and F. Kirschnick. (1995) "Research Strategies Used by OR/MS Workers as Shown by an Analysis of Papers in Flagship Journals". Operations Research, Vol. 43,(5), pp. 731-740.
It is possible to distinguish seven process categories among OR/MS research strategies: ripple, embedding, bridging, transfer of technology, creative application, structuring, and statistical modeling. To examine how often OR/MS workers use these processes, this paper analyzes as a sample the contents of the papers in the 1992 issues of Operations Research, Management Science, and Interfaces. It finds that the ripple process is dominantly used in theoretical research and the transfer-of-technology process is the one most frequently used in true applications. The paper also sets forth the full spectrum of results for all seven processes in the 1992 sample, and reaches some conclusions with possible implications for the future of OR/MS."

Reisman, Arnold. and Kirschnick, Frank. "The Devolution of OR/MS: Implications from a Statistical Content Analysis of Papers in Flagship Journals", Operations Research, 42:4 (Jul/Aug 1994): 577-588.
"Ackoff (1987) decried the devolution of Operations Research/Management Science (OR/MS), Corbett and Van Wassenhove (1993) spoke of its natural drift, and sociologist Andrew Abbott (1988) described its regression as typifying that of other learned professions. To shed light on these views, a detailed survey of a segment of the OR/MS literature is undertaken, with particular focus on the space in flagship journals devoted to theory on the one hand and applications on the other. While the literature of OR/MS contains many articles and texts with the word applications in the title and the word data in the text, the definitions and uses of these terms are precise. The claimed applications differ in degree and the actual data differ in kind. To encompass different meanings, a 5-point scale is used to classify articles in the 1962 and 1992 volumes of Operations Research and Management Science and the 1972 and 1992 volumes of Interfaces. The resulting statistical analyses shed considerable light on the direction that OR/MS is taking and raise questions about its appropriateness."

Young, Scott. T., Baird, Brad. C., and Pullman, Madeleine. E. "POM Research Productivity in U.S. Business Schools",Journal of Operations Management, 14:1 (March 1996): 41-53. (Available in the Business Library and in ScholarsPortal)

Williamson, Edgar. "Operations Resesarch Journals: An Annotated Core List" Serials Review, Vol. 18, Winter 1992, pg. 21-26
Provides a brief history and explanation of operations research and a list of core journals that the author believes is necessary to support a university program in operations research. Operations research as a highly interdisciplinary field; Applications of operations research; Designing and operating of man-machine systems.
(Available through Professional )

Barman, S., Tersine, R.J., and Buckley, M.R., "An Empirical Assessment of the Perceived Relevance and Quality of POM-Related Journals of Academicians," Journal of Operations Management, 10:2 (April 1991): 194-212. (Available in the Business Library and in ScholarsPortal)
"Researchers in the field of production and operations management, and those who evaluate them, need a clear, up-to-date picture of forums available for scholarly discourse in the field. Yet the literature contains no recent, large-scale, objective study of such publishing forums. The results of such a study are presented. A citation analysis methodology is employed to examine citation trends for books, proceedings and journals, and to determine a relative ranking of journals influencing POM research. Results of a previously reported subjective journal ranking were used to determine 5 base journals for the citation analysis. The data collection effort produced over 30,000 citations for the years 1989-1993. The journal rankings generated are compared with those of the earlier subjective studies in the POM field."

III. Related Ranking Web Sites


“Journal Quality List” Compiled and edited by Prof. Anne-Wil Harzing

AACSB – The Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of Business
In their “Research/Scholarship Resource Center see: “Journal Rankings and Indices of Research Productivity:


Cranfield School of Management Journal Rankings


American Marketing Association
See: Journal Ranking Literature and Tables

“A Ranking of Marketing Journals” by Tomas Hult at the Academy of Marketing Science. http://www.ams-web.org/displaycommon.cfm?an=1&subarticlenbr=10

Information Systems:
Association for Information Systems

IS Journal Rankings by Faculty at Mississippi State


Business Library Staff
(Errors, omissions or suggestions for additions can be submitted to buslib@ivey.uwo.)