ib journal ranking (jwb 2016)

Revisiting the Standing of International Business Journals in the Competitive Landscape

• Tüselmann, Heinz, Rudolf R. Sinkovics, and Grigory Pishchulov (2016), "Revisiting the standing of international business journals in the competitive landscape," Journal of World Business, 51 (4), 487-498. (DOI: 10.1016/j.jwb.2016.01.006).

• http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jwb.2016.01.006

Journal Ranking JWB - doi: 10.1016/j.jwb.2016.01.006 1

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jwb.2016.01.006




Authors


1


Authors — Tüselmann, Sinkovics, Pishchulov

• Prof Heinz Tüselmann » Professor of International Business

Manchester Metropolitan University Business [email protected]/cibi

• Prof Rudolf R. Sinkovics» Professor of International Business

The University of Manchester, Manchester Business [email protected] www.manchester.ac.uk/research/rudolf.sinkovics

• Dr Grigory Pishchulov» Assistant Professor in Supply Chain Management

TU Dortmund Universitygrigory.pishchulov@tu-dortmund.dewww.wiso.tu-dortmund.de/scm/

mailto:[email protected]

http://www.business.mmu.ac.uk/cibi


http://www.manchester.ac.uk/research/rudolf.sinkovics


http://www.wiso.tu-dortmund.de/scm/

Background, problem and motivation

2



Background and problem

• Background» Globalization, marketization, massification and metrification of higher education

system» Highly contested, but increasing popularity of ranking of research outputs

(Mingers and Harzing 2007; Pontille and Torny 2010)» Methodologies underlying vary considerably, potential biases (method,

subjectivity etc.) (Hult, Reimann, Schilke 2009; Worlinson et al. 2011; Wilhelm and Hazelkorn 2011)

» Drivers of ‘ranking race’: Academic associations, e.g. ABS, ARC, AACSB, industry players, e.g. Thomson Reuters ISI, Elsevier, Google

• Problem» Senior university management loves it (superficially ‘fair’ resource allocation)» Standing within subject area is perhaps tacitly known, but between subject area

knowledge is hidden» Academics are ‘driven’ rather than ‘driving the process’» Proliferation of lists generates superficial landscape of ‘objectivity’, while indeed

biases of rankings are amplified


Motivation

• Accept that lists will exist irrespective of inherent problems» offer a refreshed and methodologically advanced perspective

• Create a consensus (integrating lists) and advancing above and beyond previous ranking snapshots» comprehensive with respect to quality and quantity

• Develop an appreciation of the standing of specific journal outlets within the broader context of journals from neighbouring subject areas


Journal ranking approaches and our methodological contribution

3


Journal rankings — How?

• Subjective rankings» Stating preferences or perceptions of academic peers, » Experts determine a ranking of a set of particular journals

• Objective rankings» Revealed preferences: actual publishing behaviour is measured in

terms of e.g. citation impact factor (IF) or the h-index • E.g. Cook, Raviv, & Richardson 2010; Mingers, Watson, & Scaparra 2011

• Combination of already existing lists» For Bus & Mgmt — Set of existing lists is available from Harzing’s JQL,

http://www.harzing.com/» Academic journal quality guide 2015 — produced by the Chartered

Association of Business Schools (CABS), http://charteredabs.org/academic-journal-guide-2015/

• E.g. Cook, Raviv, & Richardson 2010; Mingers & Harzing 2007

http://www.harzing.com/

http://charteredabs.org/academic-journal-guide-2015/




Our methodological contribution

• Aggregate journal ranking» Combination approach» Integrating subjective and objective rankings

• Coverage» Across bus and mgmt sub-disciplines» Imputation of missing ranks for unranked journals => most

comprehensive database

• Method» Data imputation: Random forests framework» Journal rating: Data envelopment analysis with ordinal rank data

Methodology

4



Fig. A1. Overview of the methodological approach

JQL + JCR

CART

Random Forests

Ordinal DEA

Rating + Ranking

Missing dataimputation

Aggregationof rankings

905 journals, as of June 2015

819 journals


Primary data base — Harzing’s JQL

Target ranking lists:

» 10 most recent ones (some are excluded)

» coverage: 2008–2015

Journal Quality List (55th ed.)

» compilation of 17 worldwide journal rankings

» business, management and econ disciplines

» coverage: 2007–2015, 905 journals


Table A1. Target lists

No. Title Year Abbreviation

1 Aston 2008 Ast 2008

2 Hautes Etudes Commerciales de Paris Ranking List 2011 HEC 2011

3 University of Queensland Adjusted ERA Ranking List 2011 UQ 2011

4 Cranfield University School of Management 2012 Cra 2012

5 ERASMUS Research Institute of Management Journal Listing 2012 EJL 2012

6 Australian Business Deans Council Journal Ranking List 2013 ABDC 2013

7 Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique 2014 CNRS 2014

8 Association of Business Schools Academic Journal Quality Guide 2015 ABS 2015

9 ESSEC Business School Paris 2015 ESS 2015

10 Association of Professors of Business in German-speaking countries 2015 VHB 2015

11 Impact Factor from the Thomson Reuters’ Journal Citation Reports 2014 Thomson Reuters 2015

￩ JQL

￩ JCR


Data missingness problem

Journal Subject area Ast 2008

HEC 2011

UQ 2011

Cra 2012

EJL 2012

ABDC 2013

CNRS 2014

ABS 2015

ESS 2015

VHB 2015

Abacus F&A 3 B+ 2 2 P A 3 3 1 B

Academy of Management Annals Gen & Strat B 4 A* 2 1 A

Academy of Management Journal * Gen & Strat 4 A 1 4 STAR A* 1 4* 0+ A+

Academy of Management Learning & Education Gen & Strat B 1 3 A* 3 4 1 B

Academy of Management Perspectives (formerly AoM Executive) * Gen & Strat 2 2 3 S A 3 2 B

Academy of Management Review * Gen & Strat 4 A 1 4 STAR A* 1* 4* 0+ A+

Academy of Marketing Science Review Marketing 3 B 2

Accounting and Business Research F&A 3 B 2 2 S A 3 3 2 B

Work Employment & Society OS/OB,HRM/IR 3 2 4 S A 3 4 B

World Bank Economic Review Economics B 4 A 1 3

World Bank Research Observer Economics C B 2

World Development Economics 3 B+ 3 A 1 3

World Economy Economics 2 3 A 2 2

World Wide Web - Internet and Web Information Systems MIS, KM S C

Written Communication Comm 3 B

Zeitschrift für Betriebswirtschaft Gen & Strat B

Zeitschrift für Soziologie Sociology

Coverage: 62 37 47 46 29 91 58 80 42 51 %


Approach to data missingness

• Imputation by means of non-parametric methods» do not rely on a pre-specified data model

→ Classification and regression trees (CART — Breiman et al. 1984)» resistant to irrelevant variables and outliers, fast to train» strong emphasis on possible data missingness in predictors

→ Random Forests (Breiman 2001)» ensembles of trees, grown via random selection of predictors» easy to train, non-parametric, non-linear» excellent accuracy, one of the most competitive methods

• Implementation — a fuzzy rank approach» treating each target list as a response, all others — as predictors» imputing the degree of membership of each journal to each rank


Aggregate rating

• Data envelopment analysis (DEA — Charnes et al. 1978)» established approach to multi-attribute performance evaluation

of peer entities having common inputs and outputs» overcomes the need to define input and output weights a priori» performance evaluation is data-driven, removal of subjective bias

→ Application of DEA to a ranked voting system (Cook & Kress 1990)» peer entities: candidates in a preferential election» outputs: number of times being ranked 1st, 2nd, etc.» rank discrimination by imposing a strong order on output weights

• Implementation: candidates = journals; voters = target ranking lists» outputs: journal’s degree of membership to each rank in each list» rank discrimination via Nash bargaining between journals» aggregate ratings derived via cross-evaluation (Green et al. 1996)


Results

5


Table A2. Top 5% journals of business, management and related areas


Table A3. Ranking of IB journals within IB subject area


Discussion

6


YAJR (Yet another journal ranking)? – Not just!

• Considerable changes to the competitive milieu of IB journals» expanded and multi-tier core IB journal context, ascent of Asia journals» IB is permeable, not only journals that carry “IB” in their label

• Top of IB journals» JIBS improves position, JWB has joined upper tier journals

• Journal contestation below JIBS and JWB» major inroads made by Asia-focused journals and new journals» Shake up and expansion of what constitutes “core” IB journals

• Regional and infant-journal arguments» Do not hold categorically, more nuanced picture

• Competitive positions of IB journals vis-à-vis other subject areas» JIBS and JWB perform well in upper tier» Long tail of IB journals at lower end when compared to other subjects

• Lessons for well-being and growth of IB as a subject area» Cultivate and deliberate search for good and interesting papers!» Nurture special issues with contemporary topics (real-world issues)


Resources

Tüselmann, Heinz, Rudolf R. Sinkovics, and Grigory

Pishchulov (2015), "Towards a consolidation of worldwide

journal rankings – a classification using random forests and

aggregate rating via data envelopment analysis," Omega,

51 (0), 11-23. (DOI: 10.1016/j.omega.2014.08.002).

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.omega.2014.08.002

Tüselmann, Heinz, Rudolf R. Sinkovics, and Grigory

Pishchulov (2016), "Revisiting the standing of international

business journals in the competitive landscape," Journal of

World Business, 51 (4), 487-498. (DOI:

10.1016/j.jwb.2016.01.006). http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jwb.2016.01.006