FT50 list of journals updated

Last released in 2016, there are some big changes in this iteration

Update to a now dated newsflash.

The new FT50 list came out this spring, and there is a little bit of shocker in there for European management scholars and those of us who have benefited from the openness of certain journals towards historical research.

The new FT50 list removed three journals identified as less influential:

• Human Relations

• Journal of Business Ethics

• Organization Studies

They have been replaced with three others judged more relevant:

• Academy of Management Annals

• American Sociological Review

• Psychological Science

So, real win for AOM, and the disciplinary core journals… From the perspective of historical researchers in the field, not such good news.

The other really interesting thing, though, which as a member of the scientific committee of the Academic Journal Quality Guide, is this:

The new journals all have high impact factors, top ratings from academic bodies including the Chartered Association of Business Schools, and contain a significant number of articles contributed by faculty from leading ranked institutions.

Beyond this, apparently, the review is ongoing and will also consider how to better distinguish influential practitioner journals, such as Harvard Business Review. For more information, visit the FT through the link below:

Updates

Not long after the revised FT50 launched, it became the FT49, with the announcement that MIT Sloan’s Management Review would cease publishing (the link to its page now appears to be defunct). It’s oddly comical.

But guess what? The FT50 might be significant for most of our US American colleagues, but elsewhere in the world, your school’s performance on the QS (Quacquarelli-Symonds) ranking may matter a great deal more. And business historians are the secret sauce that could super-charge your school’s performance, and you may not even know…