Sie sind auf Seite 1von 54

ACADEMIC

JOURNAL

GUIDE

2015

ABS*^

** ASSOCIATION of BUSINESS SCHOOLS

CONTENTS

ABS*^

^ASSOCIATION* B IS IM 'S S SCHOOLS

Acknowledgements

3

Editors'Introduction

5

Methodology

6

Conclusion

10

References

14

Tables

Accounting

15

Business History and Economic History

17

Economics, Econometrics and Statistics

18

Entrepreneurship and Small Business Management

25

Finance

26

General Management, Ethics and Social Responsibility

29

Human Resource Management and Employment Studies

30

Information Management

31

Innovation

33

International Business and Area Studies

34

Management Development and Education

35

Marketing

36

Operations

and Technology Management

38

Operations Research and Management Science

40

Organisation Studies

42

Psychology (General)

43

Psychology (Organisational)

45

Public Sector and Health C are

47

Regional Studies, Planning and

Environment

48

Sector Studies

49

Social Sciences

51

ABS*^

^ASSOCIATION* BISINKSS SCHOOLS

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

A MESSAGE FROM THE MANAGEMENT BOARD

We are hugely grateful to the Editors, Methodologists and members of the Scientific Committee without whom the Academic

Journal Guide 2015 would not be possible.The work they have carried out to analyse data, consult with subject communities and find consensus has led to an impressive and robust Guide to the range, subject matter and quality of journals in which business and management academics publish their research. With their hard work we have a Guide which is genuinely

based upon peer review, along with editorial and expert judgements following from the evaluation of many hundreds

of publications.

We are also very thankful to the founding Editors of the Guide.‘The ABS Guide'was originally created and then published in

2009 through the initiative of Professor Charles Harvey, Aldan Kelly, Professor Huw Morris, and Professor Michael Rowlinson. Supported by their peer community they have helped produce a very valuable service to the business and management

academic community. This 2015 edition of the Guide continues and builds on their work.

Finally, we must thankThomson Reuters for the permission to use their JCR data, and Elsevier for the use of their SNIP and SJR metrics powered by Scopus.

Academic Journal Guide M anagement Board

Professor Rolf D. Cremer, Dean Emeritus of CEIBS and Head, Global Bridges China Forum (Chair of the Board)

Professor Angus Laing, Dean of Business & Economics, Loughborough University and Chair, Association of Business Schools

Professor Bob Galliers, Bentley University

Anne Kiem, Chief Executive, Association of Business Schools

We would like to thank the following individuals:

Co-Editors in Chief

Professor Geoffrey Wood, Warwick Business School

Professor David Peel, Lancaster University Management School

Chief M ethodologists

Professor Marc Goergen, Cardiff Business School

Professor James Walker, Henley Business School

M ethodologist

Professor Andrew Simpson, Sheffield University Management School

Chair o f the Scientific Committee

Professor Heinz Tuselmann, Manchester Metropolitan University Business School

Scientific C om m ittee Members

ABS*^

^ASSOCIATION* BUSINESS SCHOOLS

Accounting

Prof. Lisa Jack Management Control Association / University of Portsmouth

Prof.

Kevin Holland

Cardiff Business School

Banking

Prof. John Wilson

British Accounting and Finance Association / University of S t Andrews

Behavioural Science

Prof. Wandi Bruine de Bruin European Association for Decision Making / Leeds University Business School

Business & Economic History

Prof. Geoffrey G. Jones

Harvard Business School

Economics

Prof.

Robert Taylor

Essex University

Prof. Tim Worrall University of Edinburgh Business School

Enterprise/ Entrepreneurship

Prof. Mike W right

Imperial College Business School, London

Ethics, CSR and Management

Prof. Stephen Brammer

Birmingham Business School

Finance

Prof. Marco Pagano

European Finance Association / University of Naples

Human Resource Management

Prof.

Pawan Budwar

Aston Business School

Innovation Prof. Ammon Salter University of Bath School of Management

International Business

Prof. Heinz TUselmann

Manchester Metropolitan University Business School

Inform ation Management

Prof. Bob Galliers

Association for Information Systems / Bentley University

Management Education

Prof.

Ken Starkey

University of Nottingham

Marketing

Prof. Gllles Laurent

Fondation Nationale pour I'Enseignement de la Gestion des Entreprises / HEC Paris

Prof. Nina Reynolds

Academy of Management / University of Southampton

Operations Management Prof. Cipriano Forza

European Operations Management Association / University of Padua

Organisational Psychology

Organisational Psychology and General Management

Organisational Sociology Prof. Nic Beech University of S t Andrews School o f Management

Operational Research and Management Science

Prof. Marc van Veldhoven

Prof. David Guest

Prof. Juergen Branke

European Association of Work and Organizational Psychology/Tilburg University

King’s College London

Committee of Professors of Operational Research / Warwick Business School

Public Sector

Prof. Steve

Martin

Cardiff Business School

Regional & Area Studies

Prof. Frank Horwltz

Cranfield School of Management

Regional Studies, Planning & Environment

Prof. Ron Martin

Judge Business School, University of Cambridge

Sector Studies Prof. Julie Froud

Manchester Business School

Social Sciences

Prof. Peter McKleman Strathclyde Business School

Prof. Mark Stuart British Universities Industrial Relations Association / Leeds University Business Schoc

Sports, Leisure and Tourism

Prof. Stephen Page

Association for Events Management Education / School of Tourism, Bournemouth University

Prof. John Tribe

Association for Tourism in Higher Education / University o f Surrey Business School

Statistics

Prof.

Robert Taylor

Essex University Business School

Strategy

Prof. Henk Volberda

European Academy of Management / Rotterdam School of Management

Dr Sotirios Paroutls Strategic Management Society / Warwick Business School

2010 Editorial Team

We would also like to thank the Editors of the 2010 Academic Journal Quality Guide ('The ABS Guide 2010*):

Professor Charles Harvey, University of Newcastle

Aidan Kelly, Goldsmiths, University of London

Professor Huw Morris, formally University of Salford, now Welsh Government

Professor Michael Rowlinson, Queen Mary University of London

EDITORS’ INTRODUCTION

The Purpose and Features of the Academic Journal Guide

Welcome to the Association of Business Schools’ Academic

Journal Guide (the Guide). The Guide is based upon peer review, editorial and expert judgements following

the evaluation of many hundreds of publications, and is

informed by statistical information relating to citation. It is

a guide to the range, subject matter and relative quality of journals in which business and management academics publish their research.

The primary motivation of the Editors and the Scientific

Committee is to provide a level playing field. Emerging

scholars will have greater clarity as to which journals to

aim for, and where the best work in their field tends to be clustered. By the same measure, publication in top journals gives scholars a recognised currency on which career

progress can be based; should personal networks deny its currency in one institution, there will be others who will

recognise and welcome it

Good work may of course be found anywhere, but it is

a generally held view that good work is more likely to

be found in some journals as compared to others. The

Editors recognise that any guide that seeks to differentiate

between journals will naturally be contentious. Some of this will reflect the natural tensions in academia between

shared scholarly identity, exchange and debate, and the

individual pursuit o f very specialised knowledge that, when disseminated, is likely to be only accessible to a very

small audience. It will also reflect the tensions between

efforts to commodify academic labour time, and the

acclaim exceptional bodies of work receive across the scholarly community. Whilst recognising that exceptional scholarly work may be found In many places, we similarly

accept that such work tends to be clustered in particular locales and journals, in a process that may reflect both

the availability of resources, and accumulated collective human capital. Identifying such locales is a difficult and

fraught process, but we remain convinced that it is better to be done through the involvement of scholarly experts

and their associations than without. We would welcome

feedback and dialogue with representative scholarly associations that have not participated in this iteration,

with a view to broadening the basis of representation in

future iterations of the Guide.

ABS*^

ASSOCIATION «f Bl SINI'SS SCHOOLS

The Guide is distinctive in that, unlike other journal guides,

it is not based purely on some weighted average o f journal

metrics. Rather, the Guide reflects the perceptions of the

Editors, informed by the Scientific Committee and by expert peers and scholarly associations with whom they consulted

as to the relative standing of journals in each subject area.

As a consequence, there is no mechanistic metrics based formula that will capture the published ratings.

On occasion, the ratings of some journals, when based purely

on such metrics, do not reflect the views of the relevant academic community. Our purpose therefore was to produce

a guide that took into consideration this subjective input.

The subject experts (members of the Scientific Committee

representing individual subject areas) were provided with a

variety of metrics for each journal (detailed below) and were

asked to consult widely within their respective subject area academic communities. In the case of overlapping fields or

expertise, subject experts worked together in a process that was

distinguished by a collegiate approach. Proposed ratings were considered by the Editors and Methodologists.The Editors then

engaged in feedback and consultation with subject experts. On

the basis that a disproportionate number of highly rated journals

undermines the notion of excellence in any given subject area, as well as comparisons across subject areas, the Editors, in some

cases, were not able to follow the initial advice given, leading to

a process of further consultation and compromise.

The Guide is not intended to be a fully comprehensive

one, given, inter alia, the problems of demarcating what is

either business and management research and/or relevant to it, and what is not. Inclusion in the Guide is wholly at

the discretion of the Editors and the Scientific Committee, and no undertakings have been made that all journals will have been included. Non-inclusion in the Guide should not necessarily be taken as a judgment of journal quality, but may

reflect a wide range of factors, ranging from the aims and

scope of the journal that lie outside the scope of business and management studies to, quite simply, the Scientific

Committee and those they consulted, not encountering

sufficient evidence on which to formulate an opinion.

As outlined in the methodology section, the Guide builds on

the previous ABS Guide 2010; and the Editors of this Guide

owe a debt of gratitude to the Editors and Scholarly Experts involved in the former.

METHODOLOGY

The brief agreed between the Editorial Team and the Chair

of the Academic Journal Guide Management Board can be summarised as follows:

I. The Guide should be designed primarily to serve the

needs of the business and management research

community, in terms of both helping authors identify suitable outlets for their work, and where work of a

particular level is likely to be clustered.

II. The Guide should classify journals into four categories

(1 to 4) plus a Journal of Distinction category, which

recognises the quality of those journals ranked as a ’top' class journal in at least three out of five international

listings consulted.

III. The classification process should be stringent

and methodical in all cases, embracing five sources o f evidence:

a. The assessments of leading researchers in each of the

main fields and sub-fields covered;

b. The mean citation impact scores for the most recent

five-year period (where available);

c. Evaluation by the Editors and Scientific Committee

members of the quality standards, track

records, contents and processes of each journal

included in the Guide;

d. The number of times the journal was cited

as a top journal in five lists taken to be

representative o f the 'world' rating of business and

management journals; and

e. The length of time a journal has been established. Note that any newly established journals as well as

more established journals that were not in the previous

'ABS Guide 201 O' enter with a maximum rating 3 other than in exceptional circumstances.

of

IV. The Guide should be comprehensive in the coverage of

research conducted in business schools internationally, covering a wide range of disciplines, fields and sub-fields within the social sciences and taking an

inclusive approach to what constitutes business and

management research.

ABS*^

in

^ASSOCIATION of

s in i's s

s c h o o ls

V. The Editors put forward the final classification of

all journals included in the Guide, following full consideration of feedback on the last version of the

ABS Guide 201 O'and the recommendations made by a

panel of experts representing the main sub-disciplines

within the field.

VI. The Editors should publish and justify their working methods and their approach to the issues of classification

in a written methodology.

Whilst acknowledging the excellent work of their

predecessors, we need to also acknowledge that the Guide

differs from the ABS Guide 2010'in that it includes additional

metrics (e.g. the SNIP), whilst the Scientific Committee is much larger.

Rating Definitions and Issues

ABS*^

^ASSOCIATION of BUSINESS S C IIO O lii

In Table 1, the definitions o f the journal ratings are set out. This draws on the previous iterations o f the 'ABS Guide'.

Rating

4*

Meaning of Quality Rating

Journals of Distinction. Within the business and management field including economics, there are a small number of grade 4 journals that are recognised world-wide as exemplars of excellence. Their high status Is acknowledged by their inclusion In a number of well-regarded international journal quality lists. The Guide normally rates a journal 4* if they are rated in the highest category by at least three out of the five non-university based listings - Financial Times 45, Dallas List, VHB, Australian Deans' List, CNRS. In addition, journals from core social sciences disciplines that do not appear in those listings may also be rated 4* on the grounds that they are clearty of the finest quality and of undisputed relevance to business and management. In the Guide o f 2015, this applies to three journals from the fields of sociology and psychology.

All journals rated 4, whether Included in the Journal of Distinction category or not, publish the most original and best-executed

4 research. As top journals in their field, these journals typically have high submission and low acceptance rates. Papers are heavily refereed. Top journals generally have the highest citation impact factors within their field.

3 rated journals publish original and well executed research papers and are highly regarded. These journals typically have good

submission rates and are very selective In what they publish. Papers are heavily refereed. Highly regarded journals generally have 3 good to excellent Journal metrics relative to others in their field, although at present not all journals in this category carry a citation Impact factor.

Journals in this category publish original research of an acceptable standard. A well regarded journal in Its field, papers are fully

2 refereed according to accepted standards and conventions. Citation impact factors are somewhat more modest in certain cases. Many excellent practitioner-oriented articles are published in 2-rated journals.

These journals, In general, publish research of a recognised, but more modest standard In their field. Papers are in many instances 1 refereed relatively lightly according to accepted conventions. Few journals in this category carry a citation impact factor.

Source: Adapted from Harveyet al. (2010)

A

key challenge we have addressed to ensure the credibility

with the outcome and that is why further input from

of

the Guide is to try to manage the number of journals

scholarly associations will be sought in subsequent

that are upgraded in any subject area and to maintain

iterations of the Guide.

proportionate levels of 3 and 4 rated journals. In addition,

there is an issue surrounding journal downgrades; as many

academics will have already published in such journals, it can mean that their work would be viewed in a less positive light.

This makes for strong vested interests against downgrades,

making for strong pressures for ratings to be downwardly ‘’sticky* Should journals only be upgraded, this would

make for ever more 3s and 4s, with the 3 rating eventually

becoming seen as the "new two’ and with work that is

genuinely of a 3 level being seen in a less favourable light. As a consequence, the Editors had to balance the objective

of ensuring that representatives of the scholarly community

had a real say in the ratings, and that as diverse a range of

research as possible is recognised, as well as ensuring the ratings retain credibility.

Nevertheless, wherever an upgrade or downgrade clearly proved to be warranted, the Editors did proceed with the upgrade or downgrade. It cannot be said, however,

that all subject representatives are entirely satisfied

The Process

The methodology underpinning the Guide consists of

evaluations of journals not based solely on metrics but reflecting (to a degree) subject specialists'views. This is a

distinctive feature of the Guide. While the approach followed

that undertaken for the previous *ABS Guide', published in

2010, we have endeavoured to engage more widely with expert peers and scholarly associations in producing the

current Guide.

In detail, the five m ethodological components

are as follows.

First, an open call was issued for applications for journals

to be added to those included in the Guide.The members

of the Scientific Committee representing particular areas ("subject experts’) were then tasked to confirm whether

the expanded list did indeed provide a good coverage of

published research conducted in business schools in their respective domains. The subject experts were encouraged to

consult with learned societies, professional associations and/

or leading academics in their area.

Second, the Chief Methodologists analysed the data collected from: (i) The Web of Knowledge (WoK) Journal

Citation Report (JCR); (ii) the SCImago Journal Rank (SJR), and (iii) the Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP).

Third, evaluations were conducted by subject experts, again

based on the consultations with learned societies, professional associations and/or leading academics in their area.

Following this process, the Chief Methodologists, the Chair

of the Scientific Committee and the Editors met with the

Scientific Committee in London on July 11th, 2014. This

allowed the Committee as a whole to review the proposed

ratings of the journals under consideration in their entirety. The Chief Methodologists explained that inflation of grades

was an issue to be avoided, and that we would request

further modification o f the proposed ratings in

light of this.

Fourth, the Editors then suggested modifications, informed

by further correspondence and consultation with Scientific

Committee members, and a further round of evaluation

of the metrics. The subject experts were asked to provide

further information and possible modification of ratings on

the basis of the proportion of journals proposed in each

category where this appeared too inflated. Also, further information was requested to support the proposed rating

of particular journals where these were rather different

than implied by metrics. Evaluations were further peer reviewed by the Scientific Committee to provide additional

quality control.

Fifth, on August 22nd, 2014, the Chief Methodologists, the Chair of the Scientific Committee and the Editors met in

Manchester and determined provisional ratings given all the

inputs to that date. These new' ratings were then sent to the subject experts for comment. A further round of discussions

was entered into until agreement w'as reached for each

subject area. The outcome reflected the Editors'view of

what appeared a "fair*outcome overall while preserving the credibility of the Guide.

A really positive outcome is that, whilst all areas have had

to make very hard choices, in each area, the Scientific

Committee members (who are listed on page 4 of this Guide)

A

B

S

* ^

^.ASSOCIATION*/ BUSINESS S C IIO O lii

and the Editors were able to reach compromise agreements,

or at least acceptance of the final ratings for journals in their respective areas o f expertise.

Evading the Tragedy of the Commons

A key challenge we have faced is trying to ensure that the

interests of as many communities as possible were heard, but at the same time avoiding a tragedy of the commons

outcome. Ifjournals in all areas were to have been upgraded

beyond what could clearly be justified by improvements in

the quality of research, and/or were it to be seen that there are disproportionately too many 3s and 4s in any particular field,

there is a risk that schools would not adopt the Guide and rely on their own methods. In other words, we are treading a narrow path between working to ensure that representatives

of the scholarly community have a real say in the Guide,

and that as diverse a range of research is recognised as

practically possible, whilst at the same time ensuring rigour and making hard choices so that the currency is not unduly

debased. Disagreements were resolved through negotiation,

made possible by a shared common purpose of fairness

and the need to recognise excellence in the business and management fields covered by the Guide.The Editors were

able to gain further insights into the specific dynamics of each

field through discussions with the experts, and the latter were able to gain a better understanding of the problems of an

overall tragedy of the commons scenario should too many

journals in too many areas be upgraded.

Why is that Journal Awarded that Rating?

Readers/users are not likely to agree with the rating of every

journal. Indeed, there were cases about which members of the Scientific Committee disagreed with the Editors. However,

the Editors and the Scientific Committee have spoken to

many individual scholars and scholarly associations and there

is a remarkable general consensus concerning most journals,

albeit with a relatively small number of difficult, contentious

cases. These cases require more discussion in the future. One

or

tw o ratings may still appear unusual to readers/users, but

it

is worth considering that the Scientific Committee indudes

many experts who are party to a wide range of information,

that not all may be similarly aware of. More broadly

speaking, we have simply awarded journals ratings, and any conclusions as to the worth of the journal the reader/user

reaches are his or her own. Reviewing the Guide, a critical reader/user may conclude that it is only the 4 rated journals

(or even the JOD category) that are worth considering for his

or

her work. Others may feel that a 2 rating is what matters,

as

it sets these journals apart from those that are rated 1.

Still others may find that a 1 rating is a useful indicator in that

it indicates the journal meets normal scholarly standards,

including a general expectation of peer review.

A

Note about Increases in the

Num ber o f Journals w ith

a

3 or 4 Rating

It

is important to remember that an additional number of 4s

or

3s in the Guide will not necessarily mean that there will

be a similar proportionate increase in the amount of work in

business and management categorised as falling into 3 or 4

within a particular national context. Indeed, the awarding of

a

4 rating to a journal that only carries a very small number

o

f articles a year by business and management scholars

will have a very limited effect. In contrast, the award of a 3

rating to a journal that publishes a large number of articles a year on business and management topics will have a more

significant one.

Again, the average number of articles carried by ajournal within a particular issue will affect how much work is

published in 3 or 4 rated outlets in a particular field. In terms

of categorising research in a particular national context, the

proportion of work by local scholars typically carried by that

journal is an important considering factor; many journals

are dominated by contributors from one nationality, and

not another. For example, the award of a high rating to a journal that carries little work by scholars in business and

management will have little effect, although of course,

it may encourage more submissions from business and

management scholars in future. A note of caution is also

urged in looking at the proportion of 3 and 4 rated journals

in

a particular field; again, the proportion of 3s and 4s will

to

a large extent be a product of the number of 1 rated

journals included. In very large areas, there is likely to be a

large number of journals with low ratings. Hence, readers of

the ABS Guide are cautioned against simply counting the number of 3 and 4 rated journals in a particular field, and

comparing the result with other fields. Any conclusions that

do not take these issues into account might be misleading.

ABS*^

(frASSOCIATION 4 in s iM -s s s c h o o ls

CONCLUSION

We hope that the Guide will represent the start of a new process of dialogue with the peer community at large. No journal guide is ever definitive. The supposed objectivity

and superiority of purely metrics-based ratings is perhaps an

illusion. The Guide is based - also - on the conviction that the

expertise and experience of successful researchers provides rich grounds for including scholarly judgment in the rating of

academic journals.

We take the concerns of the peer community very seriously.

Hence, the Editors and Scientific Committee would welcome

informed input and feedback. There is room for further

established, relevant and representative scholarly associations to apply for representation on the Scientific Committee and

this would be very welcome.

The Board's intention is to update the Guide every three

years. It is the hope of the Editors and Chief Methodologists

that the process will, over time, become even more

representative and inclusive, taking account of the concerns across the community of business and management

scholarship, whilst retaining the principle of differentiation in

research outputs and evading a tragedy of the commons.

The Three Impact Factors relating to Citation Information

With regard to the citation information within the second methodological component it is not the intention of this document to provide a detailed review o f the methodologies

underlying these three impact factors. Nevertheless, in what follows we provide a brief description of these three impact

factors, including their advantages and drawbacks. The Web of Knowledge JCR was the impact factor underlying

the Guide, including its last version published in 2010. In

addition to the JCR, the new Guide uses the SJR and the SNIP. An immediate advantage of using all three impact

factors other than just the JCR is that the SJR and the SNIP are available for a much larger number of journals whereas the

JCR is more selective. Refer to Gonzalez-Pereira et al. (2010) for more information on the SJR, and Moed (2010) for more

information about the SNIP and how it compares to the SJR.

The main advantages and disadvantages of the three impact

factors are as follows (see Colledge et al. 2010 for a much more detailed comparison). The JCR is the most widely used

ABS*^

*rASSOCIATION BISIN ESSSC IKK)!^

impact factor. Its main disadvantage is that it does not adjust for differences in the number of citations across subject

areas. In particular, it tends to generate much lower values for

journals in social sciences.

The SJR's main advantages are that it adjusts for differences

in the number o f citations across subject areas and also adjusts for the prestige of a journal. However, the fact that it

adjusts for prestige also creates a drawback as sources that

are cited in more prestigious journals in turn are given more

prestige. This may result in self-perpetuating lists o f so called prestige journals.

The SNIP'S main advantage is that it normalises citations across subject areas and that it does so without relying on

classifications of subject areas that in turn would create

limitations.1However, as the SNIP does not adjust for the

percentage of reviews published in a journal it tends to have higher values for journals publishing reviews. It is also more

prone to editorial ’game playing’via journal self-citations.

Bearing in mind that all three impact factors have advantages as well as drawbacks - i.e, no impact factor is perfect - a

strong case can be made for the need to consult all three

impact factors (wherever available) when assessing the quality of a journal.This is the approach adopted for the

Guide. The three impact factors were standardised across each subject area in a similar way to the 2010 version of

the'ABS Guide'

The 2010’ABS Guide'used the 2008 two-year JCR (which is

the number of 2008 citations of papers published in a given

journal during 2006-7) and the five-year mean citation impact factor (which is the five-year mean impact factor for 2004-8).

The new Guide uses the mean JCR impact factor based on

the average of the five-year impact factors for the years 2008

to 2012} This average is then standardised by subtracting the

average for the subject area and dividing this difference by the standard deviation:12

1 Effectively, its sublet areas areTatar-made’(Moed 2010 274) which h an advantage when dealing w ith cross- and muM-dhdplinary journals

2 The five-year JCR ■mpacl(aclorfor2012statesthe2017c«atom toa)ou>nalof papers It published during the five pevtous years,I.e. 2007-2011.

ABS*^

^ASSOCIATION*

iu si\i;sssai(H)is

Standardised Impact Factor =

Journal Impact Factor -

Standard Deviation

Mean Impact Factor fo r Subject Area

o f Im pact Factor fo r Subject Area

Similarly, the'ABS Guide 2010'used standardised JCRs.The

equivalent standardised impact factors are also calculated for

the SJR and the SNIP. It should be noted, however,

standardised mean JCR and SNIP are based on the three-year impact factors’ rather than the five-year impact factors as the

that the

latter are not available.

The reason why the Guide focuses on the five-year JCR(and the

three-year SJR and SNIP) rather than the two-year JCR is that the

impact factors can be highly volatile acrossyears.Volatility affects in particular smallerjournals, i.e.journals that publish less than 30

papers (or documents as per Scopus) per year.The reason for this

greater volatility is that a greater number of articles in one year can inflate a small journal’s impact factor in a substantial way (this

could be due to e.g. a highly cited special issue). Hence, in addition to the mean standardised impact factors the subject experts were

also provided with a'small journal’indicator variable.

It should be noted that there can be considerable variability

between and across impact factors. Hence, these should not be used mechanistically and uniquely as a means of distribution.

Crucially, this variability underlines the importance of adopting

a four-step methodology. More specifically, the SJR tends to be

more volatile (with a higher standard deviation) acrossjournals than the JCRand SNIP, but this depends on the subject area (e.g,

this

The subject experts were also provided with the other metrics and data items, such as the percentage of articles not cited and the percentage of reviews per journal, to help them rate the journals in their subject area.The subject experts were asked

to rate the journals from 4 to 1. A further distinction (Journal of Distinction) was made for in respect of a small number of

journals amongst those with a rating of 4.This carries over the

pattern is more pronounced for Finance than Accounting).

range of ratings from the previous'ABS Guide 2010!

Changes in Subject Areas and Coverage in the Guide Compared to the 2010 ‘ABS Guide’

While the number of subject areas has remained at 22, there have

been some changes (seeTable 2).There are two new subject areas and two subject areasfrom the last’ABSGuide 201O'that have1

1 For example, the 2011SNi? states the citations to a journal o f papers it pub'ished n 2008.2009 and 2010.

been deleted as a result of being merged with other subject areas.

There is now a subject area for'Regional Studies, Planning and Environment', which indudes among others the journals formerly

listed under "Social Science!Psychology’has been split into two

homogenous areas, Le."Psychology (General)'and 'Psychology

(Organisational)!"Ethics and Governance’is no longer a separate subject area and the journals that were in that subject list have

been merged with ‘General Management! to form'GeneraI

Management. Ethics and Social Responsibility!lhis reflects the fact that ethical considerations are now integral to business and management research practice. Finally,Tourism and Hospitality

Management'has been merged with'Sector StucSes! with significantly more journals being induded. In addition, given the growing scholarly interest in emerging markets, thelnternational

Business'subject area now also encompasses'Area Studies! to indude some prominent area studies journals

A number of individual journals also moved from one subject

area to another one based on feedback obtained by journal

editors, the subject experts (including feedback obtained from their consultations with learned societies, professional assodations and/or leading academics in their area), the Chief Methodologists and the Editors.

The 2015 Guide covers a much larger number of journals as

compared to the 2010'ABS Guide'.This Guide indudes a total

of 1,401 journals as compared to only 745 journals covered by the'ABS Guide 201O'This corresponds to an 88% increase in

the number of journals covered. In addition to the expansions

outlined above, there were many journals added in most

subject areas, reflecting the international scope of the present Guide. Table 3 shows the distribution of journals across the

subject areas and across the four ratings categories. At the

same time, and also for practical reasons, the Guide is not intended to be fu ly comprehensive - non-inclusion in the ABS

Guide should not be taken as a judgement of journal quality.

Decisions as to the indusion of journals in the ABS Guide are

at the discretion of the Editors and informed by the advice of

members of the

not listed can contact the Editors for consideration for future

editions of the ABS Guide.

Scientific Committee. Publishers of journals

ABS*^

*rassociation

IU NIM'.SS SCHOOLS

Table 2: Subject areas covered by the new Guide compared to the 'ABS Guide 2010'

Subject areas covered by the Guide 2015

Accounting

Business History and Economic History

Economics, Econometrics and Statistics

Entrepreneurship and Small Business Management

Finance

Subject areas covered by'ABS Guide 2010*

Accounting

Business History

Economics

Entrepreneurship and Small Business Management

Finance

General Management, Ethics and Social Responsibility

General Management

Human Resource Management and Employment Studies

Information Management Information Management

Human Resource Management and Employment Studies

Innovation

Innovation

International Business and Area Studies

International Business and Area Studies

Management Development and Education

Management and Education

Marketing

Marketing

Operations and Technology Management

Operations and Technology Management

Operations Research and Management Science

Operations Research and Management Science

Organisation Studies

Organisation Studies and Public Management

Psychology (General)

Psychology (Organisational) Psychology

Public Sector and Health Care Public Sector

Regional Studies, Planning and Environment

NA

Subject area merged Into Sector Studies

Tourism and Hospitality Management

Sector Studies

Sector Studies

Sodal Sciences

Sodal Sciences

Strategy

Strategy

Merged into General Management, Ethics and Social Responsibility

Ethics and Governance

Changes made

Merger of business (broadly defined) and economic history Journals

Statistics Journals that were spread across various subject areas in the'ABS Guide 2010'(e.g. Journal of Applied Statistics under Operations Research Management Science) have now been moved to this subject area

Merger of Ethics and Governance wtth General Management. The rationale for this reorganisation h twofold. First, business ethics are now an Integral part of general management considerations. Hence, this reorganisation reflects the Increased and still Increasing importance of

ethical considerations In management and business studies. Second, the original Ethics and Governance area counted only 16journals

There has been a name change to avoid confusion with the General Management subject area

Psychology has now been split into two separate, more homogenous areas

This Is a new subject which contains, in addition to a small number of new journals, journals that were listed mainly under Sodal Sciences in the 'ABS Guide 2010'

Tourism and Hospitality Management has been merged with Sector Studies

Sector Studies now includes a much broader range of journals, including those from the Tourism and Hospitality Management area. Apart from the tourism and hospitality management journals, the new Sector Studies Indudes journals focusing on particular sectors such as energy,

services and sport

Social Sciences was a highly disparate subject area in the ABS Guide 2010'. Some o f these journals have now been moved to the new subject area of Regional Studies, Planning and Environment, and to other areas such as Business History and Economic History

Merged with General Management

Table 3: Data on Subject Areas

 

H

Accounting

6

Business History and Economic History

2

Economics, Econometrics and Statistics

23

Entrepreneurship and Small Business Management

3

Finance

8

General Management, Ethics and Social Responsibility

7

Human Resource Management and Employment Studies

5

International Business and Area Studies

2

Information Management

4

Innovation

2

Management Development and Education

1

Marketing

8

Operations and Technology Management

3

Operations Research and Management Science

5

Organisation Studies

5

Psychology (Organisational)

7

Psychology (General)

7

Public Sector and Health Care

3

Regional Studies, Planning and Environment

2

Sector Studies

5

Social Sciences

9

Strategy

1

All Subject Areas

118

ABS*^

^ASSOCIATION of BISINI-SS SCHOOLS

Distribution ofJournalsacross ratings

3

2

1

Total

21

30

23

80

5

12

7

26

68

120

108

319

5

5

7

20

29

38

30

105

10

12

15

44

10

17

16

48

7

14

17

40

17

31

27

79

2

14

11

29

3

16

23

43

12

21

25

66

9

11

36

59

22

16

22

65

4

13

7

29

13

19

30

69

13

11

24

55

10

11

9

33

12

8

2

24

10

34

44

93

27

23

3

62

3

5

4

13

312

481

490

1401

REFERENCES

ABS*^

*rASSOCIATION 4 BISINKSS SCHO O L

Colledge, L, de Moya-Anegon, F., Guerrero-Bote, V., Lopez-I Ilescas, C, El Aisati, M. H. and M. Moed (2010),'SJR and SNIP:

Two new journal metrics in Elsevier's Scopus', Serials: The Journal for the Serials Community 23,215-221.

Gonzalez-Pereira, B., Guerrero-Bote, V. P, Moya-Anegon, F. (2010), A new approach to the metric of journals’scientific prestige:

The SJRindicator'. Journal of Informetrics 4,379-391.

Harvey, C, Kelly, A., Morris, H. and M. Rowlinson (2010), Academic Journal Quality Guide, Version 4. London:

The Association of Business Schools.

Moed, H. F. (2010), 'Measuring contextual citation impact of scientific journals'. Journal of Informetrics 4,265-277.

ABS Academic Journal Guide 2015

References -1 4

3

3 3

> (3 (3

( 3 i 3 i ( 3

(3i3

i*(3(3

S $

$

$

$

5 $

ACCOUNTING

ISSN

Journal Title

0001-4826

Accounting Review

0361-3682

Accounting, Organizations and Society

0165-4101

Journal of Accounting and Economics

0021-8456

Journal of Accounting Research

0823-9150

Contemporary Accounting Research

1380-6653

Review of Accounting Studies

0001-3072

Abacus

0001-4788

Accounting and Business Research

0155-9982

Accounting Forum

0888-7993

Accounting Horizons

0951-3574

Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal

0278-0380

Auditing: A Journal of Practice and Theory

1050-4753

Behavioral Research in Accounting

0890-8389

British Accounting Review

0007-1870

British Tax Review

1045-2354

Critical Perspectives on Accounting

0963-8180

European Accounting Review

0267-4424

Financial Accountability and Management

1554-0642

Foundations and Trends in Accounting

1094-1060

International Journal o f Accounting

0278-1254

Journal o f Accounting and Public Policy

0737-4607

Journal of Accounting Literature

014S-558X

Journal o f Accounting, Auditing and Finance

0306-686X

Journal of Business Finance and Accounting

1061-9518

Journal o f International Accounting. Auditing and Taxation

0198-9073

Journal of the American Taxation Association

1044-5005

Management Accounting Research

0810-5391

Accounting and Finance

1530-9320

Accounting and the Public Interest

1744-9480

Accounting in Europe

1030-9616

Accounting Research Journal

0882-9073

Advances in Accounting (incorporates'Advances in International Accounting'ISSN 0897-3660)

1475-1488

Advances in Accounting Behavioral Research

1474-7871

Advances in Management Accounting

1058-7497

Advances in Taxation

1321-7348

Asian Review of Accounting

1608-1625

Asia-Pacific Journal o f Accounting and Economics

1035-6908

Australian Accounting Review

1936-1270

Current Issues in Auditing

1834-7649

International Journal of Accounting & Information Management

1748-8008

International Journal of Accounting Auditing and Performance Evaluation (UAAPE)

1467-0895

International Journal o f Accounting Information Systems

1090-6738

International Journal o f Auditing

1741-3591

International Journal of Disclosure and Governance

1832-5912

Journal of Accounting and Organizational Change

2042-1168

Journal of Accounting in Emerging Economies

0967-5426

Journal of Applied Accounting Research

1815-5669

Journal o f Contemporary Accounting and Economics

1542-6297

Journal o f International Accounting Research

0954-1314

Journal o f International Financial Management and Accounting

AJG

2015

4*

4*

4*

4*

4

4

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

ABS*^

Ratings

ABS

2010

4

4

4

4

3

4

3

3

3

3

3

2

3

3

2

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

2

3

2

1

1

1

2

1

2

2

ABS

2009

4

4

4

4

3

4

3

3

3

3

3

2

3

3

2

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

2

3

2

1

1

2

1

2

2

^ASSOCIATION* IU SIXTHS SCIIOOI S

baa JCR
baa
JCR

1.106

0799

1.923

1.320

0.072

0.320

0826

0986

0327

0.488

0.772

0.984

2372

1.412

4351

3323

1.025

1343

-0310

-0.142

-0338

0414

0.186

0320

-0.405

-0303

-0097

0009

-0011

-0308

-0029

-0062

0025

0330

0359

0379

0344

0328

0.430

0357

0460

0484

0569

0.553

0.470

0.615

0488

0.152

0004

0329

0.610

0013

0301

0.477

0397

2355

3.139

3.126

2.437

1007

0092

0389

0.187

0.092

0313

0863

0850

0.174

0498

0313

0669

0335

0069

0633

0290

0274

0285

0.409

1.213

0.056

0.833

0.597

0785

0.651

0782

0853

-1.084

0.946

0665

0594

0.458

- 1.011

0.724

0.444

0344

0316

0869

0.997

0324

0.323

0.273

3

4

1

2

6

5

21

17

23

7

10

9

29

20

16

11

12

25

14

15

13

22

24

8

26

40

30

43

32

37

45

42

33

51

38

19

46

41

47

49

39

35

27

4

1

2

3

6

10

IS

20

21

9

7

8

24

13

19

11

29

23

12

27

18

17

31

5

22

44

37

43

39

42

46

54

48

40

36

33

51

41

14

25

34

47

50

35

28

26

ISSN

Journal TWe

1049-2127

1096-3367

Journal of Management Accounting Research (AAA)

Journal of Public Budgeting, Accounting and Financial Management

Managerial Auditing Journal

Public Money and Management

Qualitative Research in Accounting and Management

Research in Accounting Regulation

0268-6902

0954-0962

1176-6093

1052-0457

2040-8021 Sustainability Accounting, Management and Policy Journal

1479-3598

1041-7060

1543-866X

1834-2000

1262-2788

1757-9856

1583-4387

2141-6664

Advances in Environmental Accounting and Management

Advances in Public Interest Accounting

ATA Journal of Legal Tax Research

Australasian Accounting, Business and finance Journal

C om ptabilitt ContrOte Audit

International Journal of Critical Accounting

Journal of Accounting and Management Information Systems

Journal of Accounting and Taxation

Journal of Forensic Accounting

Journal of Forensic and Investigative Accounting

Journal of Forensic Studies in Accounting and Business

Journal of Governmental & Nonprofit Accounting

Management Accounting Quarterly

Meditari Accountancy Research

Research in Governmental and Non-Profit Accounting

Research on Professional Responsibility and Ethics in Accounting

Social and Environmental Accountability Journal

Spanish Accounting Review

Spanish Journal o f finance and Accounting

1524-5586

2165-3755

1942-9053

2155-3815

17596817 Journal of Islamic Accounting and Business Research

1528-5350

2049-372X

01140582 Pacific Accounting Review

0884-0741

1574-0765

0969-160X

1988-4672

0210-2412

07366981 The EDP A udit Control, and Security Newsletter

18784917 World Tax Journal

ABS*^

^ASSOCIATION* BUSINESS SCHOOLS

 

Ratings

ABS

ABS

JCR

SJR

SNIP

2010

2009

2

2 2

 

-0.475

-0.433

2

0.611

-1.011

2

1 1

 

0398

0380

2

2 2

-1.013

0.148

0300

2

1 1

0.614

-1.031

2

0.444

0637

2

0366

-0.986

1

 

-0.477

-0.839

13

rank

JCR

SJR

SNI>

Small journal .

YES

 

rank

rank

.

34

32

(<30 doc ,

48

51

YES

28

30

18

16

SO

53

YES

31

38

YES

44

49

YES

 

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

35

45

YES

 

N/A

N/A

ABS*^

^ASSOCIATION*

iu si\i:ss schools

BUSINESS HISTORY AND ECONOMIC HISTORY

 

Journal Tide

0007-6805

Business History Review

0013-0117

Economic History Review

0007-6791

Business History

1467-2227

Enterprise and Society

1361-4916

European Review of Economic History

0014-4983

Explorations m Economic History

0022-0507

Journal o f Economic History

0958-5206

Accounting History Review (formerly Accounting, Business and Financial History)

0148-4184

Accounting Historians Journal

1032-3732

Accounting History

1467-8446

AustraSan Economic History Review

1863-2505

diom etrica: Journal of Historical Economics and Econometric History

1161-2770

Entreprises et Histoire

0967-2567

European Journal o f the History o f Economic Thought

0968-5650

Financial History Review

1053-8372

Journal

o f the History o f Economic Thought

0022-5266

Journal

o f Transport History

0023-656X

Labor History

1744-9359

Management and Organizational History

0341-6208

Bankhistorisches Archiv

1362-1572

Historical Studies in Industrial Relations

0332-4893

Irish Economic and Social History

0391-5115

Journal o f European Economic History

135S-252X

Journal of Management

History

0358-5522

Scandinavian

Economic History Review

0342-2852

Zeitschrift fur

Unternehmensgeschlcht#

AJG

2015

4

4

3

3

3

3

3

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

1

1

1

1

1

1

ABS

2010

3

4

4

3

1

3

3

2

2

2

2

2

3

1

1

2

1

ABS

2009

3

4

4

3

3

3

2

2

2

2

2

2

1

2

based on means

JCR

-0398

0333

-0.623

-0.590

1.912

0.444

0.968

-1317

0568

-1.229

-0868

SJR

-0.154

1.427

-0.218

0.000

2.277

1269

2.161

-0.378

-0.223

-0.460

-0.174

-0.450

-0.585

-0.519

-0.752

-0.740

-0.742

-0.867

-0.874

SN*>

-0.196

2.684

-0.295

-0.035

1.415

0682

1 796

-0679

-0.544

-0.740

0.593

-0.338

-0.279

-0.492

-0.496

-1.017

-0.776

-0.341

-0.943

JCR

rank

6

3

8

7

1

5

2

10

4

11

9

n

SNIP

Smal

rank

journal

(<30 doc)

 

6

7

YES

3

1

8

9

5

6

YES

1

3

YES

4

4

2

2

10

15

YES

 

N/A

 

9

14

YES

12

16

YES

7

5

YES

 

N/A

 

11

10

14

8

YES

13

12

YES

17

13

YES

15

19

16

17

YES

 

N/A

N/A

 

18

11

YES

 

YES

N/A

 

19

18

YES

 

N/A

ABS*^

^ASSOCIATION* B l SINBSS SCHOOLS

ECONOMICS, ECONOMETRICS AND STATISTICS

ISSN

Journal TWe

0002-8282

American Economic Review

0090-5364

Annals o f Statistics

0012-9682

Econometrica

0022-3808

Journal of Pofitkal Economy

0033-5533

Quarterly Journal of Economics

0034-6527

Review o f Economic

Studies

1464-3510

Biometrika

0266-4666

Econometric Theory

0013-0133

Economic Journal

0020-6598

International Economic Review

0735-0015

Journal o f Business and

Economic Statistics

0304-4076

Journal o f Econometrics

0022-0515

Journal o f Economic literature

0895-3309

Journal o f Economic Perspectives

0022-0531

Journal o f Economic Theory

0022-1996

Journal o f International Economics

0734-306X

Journal o f Labor Economics

0304-3932

Journal o f Monetary Economics

0162-1459

Journal of the American Statistical Association

1542-4766

Journal o f the European

Economic Association

1369-7412

Journal o f the Royal Statistical Society Series B (Methodology)

0741-6261

RAND Journal o f Economics

0034-6535

Review o f Economics and Statistics

1945-7782

American

Economic Journal: Applied Economics

1945-7731

American

Economic Journal: Economic Policy

1945-7707

American

Economic Journal: Macroeconomics

1945-7669

American

Economic Journal: Microeconomics

0002-9092

American Journal

of Agricultural Economics

1941-1391

Annual Review of

Economics

0007-2303

Brookings Papers on Economic A

ctivity

0309-166X

Cambridge Journal o f Economics

0008-4085

Canadian Journal o f Economics

0167-9473

Computational Statistics & Data Analysis

0012-155X

Development and Change

0921-8009

Ecological Economics

0747-4938

Econometric Reviews

1368-4221

Econometrics Journal

0013-0079

Economic Development and Cultural Change

0095-2583

Economic Inquiry

0266-4658

Economic P oky

0938-2259

Economic Theory

0013-0427

Economica

0165-1765

Economics Letters

0140-9883

Energy Economics

0924-6460

Environmental and Resource Economics

0014-2921

European Economic Review

0165-1587

European Review o f Agricultural Economics

13864157

Experimental Economics

0899-8256

Games and Economic Behavior

1057-9230

Health Economics

2041-4161

IMF Economic Review (formerly IMF Staff Papers with ISSN 1020-7635)

Ratings

junoaraisva kocm biM d on moons

-----

AJG

ABS

ABS

2015

2010

2009

JCR

4*

4

4

1.900

4*

1343

4*

4

4

2.772

4*

4

4

3.459

4*

4

4

5.110

4*

4

4

1.924

4

0373

4

3

3

-0.185

4

4

4

0.9S5

4

4

4

0.143

4

3

4

0.606

4

4

4

0835

4

4

4

5.675

4

4

4

3098

4

4

4

-0035

4

3

3

1038

4

3

3

1.159

4

4

4

0763

4

4

4

1.412

4

4

3

0.474

4

4

4

2.530

4

3

3

0.54S

4

4

4

1.750

3

0894

3

0.42S

3

0.856

3

0.165

3

3

3

-0.003

3

0.492

3

3

3

1.682

3

3

3

-0.240

3

3

3

-0.467

3

-0.163

3

0.160

3

3

3

1.160

3

2

2

-0.151

3

3

3

-0344

3

3

3

•0.117

3

3

3

•0323

3

3

3

1.105

3

3

3

-0.494

3

3

3

•0.199

3

3

3

-0.727

3

2

2

1.016

3

2

2

0.121

3

3

3

0.1S8

3

2

2

0.191

3

2

2

1.415

3

4

4

-0.037

3

2

2

0.831

3

3

3

0.614

SJR

0.928

0.800

1.867

1.758

2.625

1.397

0.315

0.237

0.259

0.307

0.253

0.382

1.453

0379

0373

0.419

0.589

0323

0315

0392

0.690

0388

0.620

0376

0.231

0375

0.402

-0.017

-0.083

0.467

-0.131

-0.128

-0.075

-0.117

0.008

0.100

-0046

-0.096

-0.086

0.184

0.032

-0.082

-0.161

0.018

-0.044

0.072

-0.080

0326

0.121

-0.048

0.072

SN«>

2.253

1306

3.498

3342

5338

2462

0.737

0.174

1.404

0.549

0.921

1.204

8.162

3.475

0.542

1.363

1.525

0.753

1.025

0.630

2.235

0.926

2.027

3.375

1.465

0.546

0.442

0.264

0.155

1.527

0.807

-0.210

0.021

0.475

0.473

0.199

-0.041

0.276

0.026

2.141

-0.066

0.201

-0.476

0.750

0.121

0.636

0.237

1.341