orgtheory.net

management journals ranking, crowdsourced

Is Administrative Science Quarterly really the #9 journal in management (as suggested by ISI/impact factors a few years ago)?  Pl-eez!  Is Management Science really #24 (as ranked by ISI in 2009) among management journals?  Is the Journal of Product Innovation Management, ahem, really a better management journal than Organization Science (relegated to #13! in 2008)?

Now you can decide.

Inspired by Kieran and Steve’s ranking initiative (of sociology departments, see here), here’s an effort to crowdsource management journal rankings:

RANK HERE: http://www.allourideas.org/management

Sure, a ranking like this has lots of problems: apples and oranges (organizational behavior, strategy, org theory journals all in one), the lack of disciplinary journals (for now), etc. It’s certainly not definitive.  But I think a crowdsourced ranking of management journals might nonetheless be quite informative, and it certainly won’t make the mistake of keeping ASQ, Organization Science or Management Science out of the top 5.  Well, we’ll see.

Updated map of where the votes are coming from:

Written by teppo

January 15, 2011 at 12:20 am

19 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. Sorta messy to add disciplinary journals into the mix, though clearly management scholars (orgs, strategy, ob) publish management-related material in these journals as well (often preferring to do so). But, what all should be included in that then — ASR, AJS, ARS, SF? and then JPSP, Psychology Review etc and then JPE, AER, JLEO etc etc. Messy. Hmm, anyone have any thoughts? For now just keeping the set to something that is roughly comparable to the ISI ‘management’ rankings, though tempting of course to add the disciplinary journals.

    (There’s a handful of management journals that I read regularly, half dozen probably, my other reading is in the disciplinary journals: econ, soc, psych, anthropology.)

    Like

    teppo

    January 15, 2011 at 12:40 am

  2. The surprising thing about doing this ranking is how many journals I have absolutely no information about to decide their quality. At least half of the comparisons, probably more, I have to pass on because I’ve never heard of the journals.

    Like

    brayden king

    January 15, 2011 at 5:17 pm

  3. Some TOP 10 mgt journal rankings I’ve run into have journals I have never heard of (e.g., the above JPIM, which was ranked ahead of Org Sci, and the latter was #13 or something – please).

    This crowdsourced ranking will not have that problem.

    Like

    teppo

    January 15, 2011 at 5:28 pm

  4. […] management journal rankings, crowdsourced […]

    Like

  5. Need to add some caveats to this post.

    First, yes, I’m unfairly highlighting some one-year aberrations in impact factors (and other rating mechanisms) — the 5-yr impact factors, for example, do better. That said, I definitely think the crowdsourced ranking reveals some unique information (it already does — check out the current ranking, and compare to others).

    Second, boy, I still don’t know just how to deal with the breadth of possible journals that one might add into the mix (I simply used ISI’s “management” list of journals from their ranking — which is a huge set, there are dozens and dozens of journals in there that I have never heard of). There are of course a lot of specialty journals in there — this ranking certainly isn’t meant to be a knock on them, at all — but just a comparative ranking (since we’ve got other ‘mgt’ rankings out there like this).

    Third, the whole micro-macro issue is huge here (separating those might, perhaps, make sense: OB journals versus more macro org theory/strategy). And, folks keep sending in suggestions to add AJS, ASR, etc (again: then we’d have to add both the psych and econ equivalents), so I have held off on adding disciplinary journals, even though many of us probably read (and publish in) those just as much as we read mgt journals.

    Like

    teppo

    January 16, 2011 at 12:06 am

  6. Well, if you rank a bunch of top journals in ISI using influence score rather than impact factor, this is what you get:

    1 ACAD MANAGE J 4.69
    2 ACAD MANAGE REV 4.47
    3 ADMIN SCI QUART 4.06
    4 AM SOCIOL REV 4.03
    5 AM J SOCIOL 3.56
    6 STRAT MANAGE J 2.82
    7 ORGAN SCI 2.77
    8 J MANAGEMENT 2.56
    9 MANAGE SCI 2.45
    10 ORGAN RES METH 2.25
    11 J INT BUS STUD 1.49
    12 J MANAGE STUD 1.45
    13 RES POLICY 1.25
    14 IND CORP CHANGE 1.13
    15 ORGAN STUD 0.97

    Influence score just makes more sense (5-year window, citations for an average paper are weighted by the influence of the citing journal). And yes, we have to admit that competition between journals is fierce, and that there is no reason why the historical leaders should forever remain so

    Anyway, the crowdsourcing thing is nice, but my guess is that a scholar’s year of entry in the field will determine most of its votes (reputations are so inert…)

    Like

    john

    January 16, 2011 at 9:40 am

  7. Right, no question. As I said, this certainly isn’t definitive (given all the problems, e.g. apples and oranges, causal issues). But the crowdsourced ranking does provide an interesting, different type of data point on management journals. (The final ranking may, we’ll see, mirror other rankings.)

    Like

    teppo

    January 16, 2011 at 5:05 pm

  8. I _really_ want to do this, but I need to finish a deadline now!

    Like

    Jordi

    January 16, 2011 at 9:55 pm

  9. One option to address the messiness of including the disciplinary journals is to take the top journals (say AMR, AMJ, and ASQ) and look at which journals they cite. The ISI resource provides this information. This indicates that JPSP is the sixth most cited journal in AMR, AJS is ninth, and ASR is tenth. If the goal is to influence management scholars, this would suggest that the omission of these journals is problematic, and it also suggests an objective mechanism for establishing what to include.

    Like

    Matt

    January 18, 2011 at 10:42 pm

  10. Matt: thanks for the tip, that would be one way. For now keeping it roughly comparable to other ‘management’ journal rankings (e.g., ISI) and associated analyses.

    Like

    teppo

    January 19, 2011 at 3:55 am

  11. Funny thing is, at this point, if you compare the crowdsourced ranking with the one based on influence score (see comment above), you essentially get the same (leaving aside disciplinary journals, which are not included in the two rankings in comparable ways): AMJ/AMR/ASQ are leading, followed by Org Sci/SMJ/JoM; then come MS/Org Res Methods, then JIBS/JMS/Org Stud.
    BTW, great initiative this website, thanks!

    Like

    walt

    January 19, 2011 at 8:39 am

  12. […] field of management. Voters can submit a vote as many times as they like.  There are already some blogposts on this ranking where peers discuss the pro’s and cons of performing the ranking this […]

    Like

  13. Um, ignore the results — someone went in with a good 25k votes during the last 12 hours and tried to throw the whole thing off (voting opposites and then pushing a couple journals up). We’ll put up the ‘true results’ once we toss out extremes etc.

    Like

    teppo

    January 23, 2011 at 12:05 am

  14. […] a comment » Teppo’s efforts to create a crowdsourced ranking of management journals tipped off quite a debate on the OMT (Organization and Management Theory) listserv about the […]

    Like

  15. I just caught up to this discussion, including the OMT list. Forgive my naive question, but if ASQ is quarterly, and AMJ is bi-monthly, then AMJ publishes more cite-able articles per year, correct? Wouldn’t this negatively influence ASQ’s citation count and all calculations drawn from that, whether it is friends citing friends or even “objective” influence/impact?

    Like

    Rebecca

    February 11, 2011 at 1:36 pm

  16. I tried to find the results, but questions seems closed. Did it get hacked judging by Teppo’s comment? That sucks if so. Did anything shake out?

    Like

    Jordi

    March 28, 2011 at 4:07 pm

  17. Jordi: Some additional details were posted onto the OMT blog, see here – http://omtweb.org/omt-blog/53-main/330-crowdsourcing-management-journal-rankings-

    Like

    teppo

    March 28, 2011 at 4:21 pm

  18. […] good orgheads at orgtheory.net tried to make a crowd source list, but it seems to have run […]

    Like

  19. Добрый день
    Посещаемый сайт у Вас
    Думаю о покупке ссылки на этом портале.
    контейнерные перевозки грузов Львов
    В центре и можно слева в сообщениях. Ну или каких-либо других вкусных рекламных мест.
    Возможно по тематике вашего сайта подойдёт для рекламы сайта услуги таможенного брокера для этого проекта могу заказать более дорогие статьи и обзоры.
    Поясните, как вы работаете?
    Хочу на постоянной основе покупать у вас статьи, и др. надеюсь эти сайты подойдут для ваших посетителей.
    Я покупал рекламу на разных сайтаx всего за 1950 руб. в квартал за ссылки.
    Пожалуйста отпишитесь здесь, напишите вашу цену. Нужно для отчёта

    Like

    Homsemorb

    April 14, 2011 at 10:42 am


Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: