​

I understand that the CABS Academic Journal Guide is being reviewed and that the relative position of Information Management Journals will be considered. The Information Systems Community is putting a strong case for two of their Journals in the 'Basket of Eight' to be increased from a ranking of 3 to 4. I understand that a number of journals may go down from 3 to 2 or 2 to 1.

The ranking of journals is based both on metrics and peer review by subject experts.   The Subject Experts have been asked to consult with learned societies, professional associations and/or leading academics. The subject experts for Information Management are Professor Joe Nandhakumar, Warwick Business School and Professor Cathy Urquhart, Manchester Metropolitan University Business School. 

The view of many senior colleagues in Business Schools is that the CABS list provides an accurate reflection of the quality of the paper for REF. The list is, therefore, explicitly linked to promotion, recruitment,  provision of research time and resource in many Universities. 

We currently have one 'information science' journal within the listing: JASIST.  I think it is particularly important that this Journal maintains its position in the  ranking and that it isn't downgraded in the on-going review. 

I wondered if colleagues in BAILER would be willing to provide feedback to the subject matter experts about the importance of the journal and the need to maintain its position in the CABS ranking.  I haven't consulted with other colleagues on the importance of JASIST, however, when I raised this in the 2013 review I received the following comments from colleagues working in information science or information management in either Business Schools or iSchools in the UK:  

“I share your concerns regarding the use of the ABS guide to determine journal impact and quality.  Our recently installed Director of x Business School places significant emphasis on the ABS guide.  Over the summer the guide was actually used as the principal means of allocating research allowances to staff.  Naturally, those staff who had not published in ABS listed journals were at a disadvantage.  This was obviously a problem for those in our Information Management & Systems subject group and was discussed
in detail at the time.  Our concerns were also expressed to the Director and I have been reliably informed that he has taken these concerns on board; nevertheless, the ABS guide remains the …benchmark. Incidentally, the above concerns are shared by my colleagues at …the opinions of whom I canvassed prior to emailing.”

“Personally I have found the Director's obsession with ABS to be particularly disorientating.  I recently joined X from a computing and information science department (University of Y), where a more holistic view of research publications was in operation (i.e. based more on impact factor than a (seemingly) arbitrarily compiled guide).”


A second academic responded:


“I absolutely agree with all this. It is critical - we are also now in a Business School -pretty much against our will but we needed the money and resources. This is a real problem with our IM journals.”



A third commented:


“The frustration that this is likely to create can be imagined and young researchers are most likely to suffer in this respect as their attempts to publish according to the dictat of the institution's management fail, resulting in an unfavourable review of their research outputs when the time comes for the next RAE.”

Warm regards

David

Professor David K Allen 

Leeds University Business School