In 2007, ABDC established an ABDC Journal Quality List for use by its member business schools. The aim of this initial list was to overcome the regional and discipline bias of international lists. An independent chair and discipline-specific panels reviewed the ABDC Journal Quality List in 2013 and 2009.
It is anticipated the next major review will be in 2017-18 and is likely to follow a similar process to the 2013 review with newly selected panels. Currently however, we are conducting an interim 2016 review, which will review submissions - regarding new journals started since 1 January 2011, removal of predatory open access journals, change of Field of Research (FoR) grouping and incorrect factual details - to produce a revised 2016 list.
The ABDC Journal Quality List 2013 comprises 2,767 different journal titles, divided into four categories of quality, A*: 6.9%; A: 20.8%; B: 28.4%; and C: 43.9% journals. In each Field of Research (FoR) group, journals deemed NOT to reach the quality threshold level are not listed. See disaggregated summary across FoRs.
PLEASE NOTE: In the ABDC Journal Quality List 2013 there is considerable variability in the average quality between marginal journals at either end of each rating category. Many journals legitimately crossover discipline areas but for pragmatic reasons are allocated to one FoR only.
Journal lists should be a starting point only for assessing publication quality and should not constrain researchers to a particular domain. There is no substitute for assessing individual articles on a case-by-case basis.