journal of business communication 2012 martin 3 20

http://job.sagepub.com/Communication

Journal of Business

http://job.sagepub.com/content/49/1/3The online version of this article can be found at:

DOI: 10.1177/0021943611425239

2011 2012 49: 3 originally published online 10 NovemberJournal of Business Communication

Jeanette St. Clair Martin, Barbara D. Davis and Roberta H. KrapelsPublication By Business Communication Educators

A Comparison Of The Top Six Journals Selected As Top Journals For

Published by:

http://www.sagepublications.com

On behalf of:

Association for Business Communication

can be found at:Journal of Business CommunicationAdditional services and information for

http://job.sagepub.com/cgi/alertsEmail Alerts:

http://job.sagepub.com/subscriptionsSubscriptions:

http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.navReprints:

http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.navPermissions:

http://job.sagepub.com/content/49/1/3.refs.htmlCitations:

by tahreem jamil on April 22, 2013job.sagepub.comDownloaded from

http://job.sagepub.com/

http://job.sagepub.com/content/49/1/3

http://www.sagepublications.com

http://www.businesscommunication.org

http://job.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts

http://job.sagepub.com/subscriptions

http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.nav

http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav

http://job.sagepub.com/content/49/1/3.refs.html


What is This?

- Nov 10, 2011OnlineFirst Version of Record

- Dec 19, 2011Version of Record >>


http://job.sagepub.com/content/49/1/3.full.pdf

http://job.sagepub.com/content/early/2011/11/10/0021943611425239.full.pdf

http://online.sagepub.com/site/sphelp/vorhelp.xhtml


Jeanette St. Clair Martin, professor of business communication at the University of Mississippi, University, MS. Barbara D. Davis, associate professor of business communication at The University of Memphis, Memphis, TN. Roberta H. Krapels, emeritus associate professor of business communication at the University of Mississippi, University, MS. Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Jeanette St. Clair Martin, University of Mississippi, PO Box 1848, University, MS 38677-1848; e-mail: [email protected].

Journal of Business Communication, Volume 49, Number 1, January 2012 3-20 DOI: 10.1177/0021943611425239© 2012 by the Association for Business Communication

A COMPARISON OF THE TOP SIX JOURNALS SELECTED AS TOP

JOURNALS FOR PUBLICATION BY BUSINESS COMMUNICATION

EDUCATORSJeanette St. Clair Martin

University of Mississippi

Barbara D. DavisUniversity of Memphis

Roberta H. Krapels University of Mississippi

This study compares the top six journals selected in an earlier survey of Association for Business Communication members as the top journals in which to publish for professional advancement. Those journals include Academy of Management Journal, Academy of Management Review, Administrative Science Quarterly, Journal of Business and Technical Communication, Journal of Business Communication, and Management Communication Quarterly. Using variables found in other disciplines’ journal assessment articles, comparisons were made with the following: length of articles published, disciplines of authors, statistical methodology included, major discipline of article focus, number of references included, and research methods used with sample size where appropriate. The analysis indicated significant differences among many of these journals. In selecting where to publish BMOC (business, management, organizational communication) articles, prospective authors in the area will find the information on these six journals informative and beneficial.

Keywords: business and management communication journal rankings; journal quality criteria; citations; promotion and tenure

The majority of educators who teach business and management commu-nication courses do so through business schools, based on Association for Business Communication (ABC) responses in recent surveys (Cyphert,



4 JOURNAL OF BUSINESS COMMUNICATION

2009; Rogers, Campbell, Louhiala-Salminen, Rentz, & Suchan, 2007). More importantly, college and school of business participants constitute the majority of respondents in the Rogers et al. (2007) and Cyphert (2009) articles. Furthermore, ABC members in business academic areas tend to have publication journal quality considered in tenure or promotion deci-sions more often than members housed in other areas. Department chairs or tenured faculty in business, according to these sources, more likely consider journal quality of publications listed on vita of junior faculty up for tenure or of all faculty on annual reviews, which greatly affects pay raises and promotion decisions. Many times those same business faculty perceive our association publications as not comparable to those in other business disciplines. Therefore, an analysis of articles included in the journals considered by a majority of the ABC membership to be the “top” ones for professional advancement is important. Also, knowing the differ-ences and similarities across the journals will help business, management, and organizational communication (BMOC) faculty choose appropriate journals for their articles and be able to explain the differences between the journals to superiors. The two questions that interested the authors were “what are the differences and similarities among these six journals” and “how can educators use this information for publication and tenure and promotion decisions.” In her response to Cypher, Grinois (2010) said, “We must gird ourselves for the battle, which means being aware, and . . . strategizing how we can remain viable” (p. 66). Potential authors in our field can improve their possibility of acceptance by considering the focus and characteristics of articles in the journals they wish to target.

Many times those same business faculty perceive our association publications as not comparable to those in other business disciplines.

The different BMOC academic areas include business, English, com-munication, business education, and other areas considered service or support units; therefore, superiors and peers of our members most likely encourage publication in journals from a variety of disciplines. Graham and Thralls (1998) discuss this question of identity and multidisciplinarity



Richardson / TOP JOURNALS FOR BUSINESS COMMUNICATION EDUCATORS 5

that exists, noting that “we should give up the notion of business com-munication as a single discipline or even a unified discipline and admit that our field (discipline) is multidisciplinary” (p. 10). The diversity of the accepted publications, in many cases, may prompt misunderstanding or even contempt from members of other disciplines (Cyphert, 2009). Although the diversity of the discipline often sparks contumacious com-ments from a member of one “home” area about a viewpoint espoused by a member of another “home” area, this very difference establishes the need for promulgating a list of top journals within and across the field. As Shelby (1996) notes, a discipline encompasses an organized body of knowledge and theoretical propositions in which the academics within a field or discipline do their research. That basic premise sets the stage for the need to identify regular publication expectations for such information. Rentz (2009) reinforces that idea with her discussion of The Journal of Business Communication (JBC) as a “niche” journal and of great value to all members of our profession. For members of BMOC to perceive the discipline as a legitimate one, they must share a perception of the journals in the discipline that generate innovative theories and methodologies (Krapels & Arnold, 1996). Our journals need acceptance rates comparable to other business disciplines as well as the highest quality articles in our field, and according to the standards in some departments, inclusion in the Social Sciences Citation Index (SSCI) Citation List. Since the highest percentage of respondents on the two prior surveys worked in colleges or schools of business, the fact that the top six BMOC journals from those two surveys included some of the top journals for the management area reflects business faculty opinion.

The diversity of the accepted publications, in many cases, may prompt misunderstanding or even contempt from members of other disciplines.

Because article publication constitutes an important factor in determin-ing academic prestige both for schools and for individuals (Bohrer & Dolphin, 1985; Browne & Becker, 1985; Fry, Walters, & Scheurmann,




1985; McCullough, Wooten, & Ryan, 1981; Pierce & Garven, 1995; Rogers et al., 2007), this study provides important knowledge for BMOC acade-micians. With “top” journal identification, individuals can offer research-based data concerning our journals to committees, department chairs, and other university officials interested in publication outlets that focus on BMOC topics of interest. Future promotion or reward decisions using publica-tions as a factor can consider the relevance to the field of BMOC, and members can select publications with greater credibility for their research and theoretical articles.

Another means of evaluating journals includes counting citations. Jour-nals listed in the SSCI Citation List are included in this process. The SSCI includes self-citations as well as editorials and other articles in its num-bers, and those figures can bias the citation rates. Large numbers of aca-demicians within a discipline can increase the number of citations of someone publishing within that field. Based on that fact, Russell (1999) noted that “citation counts were not sufficient to correctly identify the ‘best’ journals” (p. 30). Presently, the only BMOC journal listed in SSCI is Management Communication Quarterly (MCQ). However, SSCI does include Academy of Management Journal (AMJ), Academy of Manage-ment Review (AMR), and Administrative Science Quarterly (ASQ). Jour-nal impact factors rate the influence of articles within the publications by the number of citations received throughout the discipline and outside of the discipline. Academic disciplines with a large number of publication outlets automatically receive higher journal impact scores. Many specialty journals, such as those favored by BMOC academicians, receive much lower impact factors or are not included at all. Reinsch and Reinsch (1996) stated, “The SSCI does not cover business communication peri-odicals but does include them when they are cited by other periodicals; it thus provides an exterior view of business communication” (p. 29); how-ever, recent ABC decisions regarding its publications, Journal of Business Communication and Business Communication Quarterly, resulted in the publication board discovering our journals must be cited more often in articles published in our as well as in other journals included in the SSCI.

We wanted to discover how these journals compare on content as it relates to article discipline, number of references, length of articles, disci-plines of authors, statistical methods used, research methods used, and sample sizes. ABC members can use this information in determining where to publish BMOC articles. BMOC faculty housed in business will find the information valuable for preparing documents for tenure and




promotion decisions. Showing similarities and differences creates a new advantage to JBC readers who are BMOC faculty.

METHOD

Data gathering procedures used to establish baseline information needed prior to the journal comparisons included two separate surveys administered to academicians teaching BMOC courses at the collegiate level in the early 2000s. The results of those surveys were presented at ABC Conferences. Demographic data of the respondents included their academic area of employment. In the first survey, respondents selected from several communication professional memberships checked appro-priate publication outlets for career advancement from a list of publica-tions developed after a tally of citations from the previous 5 years of articles published in Journal of Business Communication, Business Com-munication Quarterly, Management Communication Quarterly, and Journal of Business and Technical Communication, the journals that the research-ers thought most appropriate for BMOC faculty to publish. Respondents could also add any journals they perceived as beneficial for professional advancement. Only ABC members received the second survey, shortened to include only those journals receiving at least 10 votes in the first survey, and they identified their perception of the “top” BMOC journals. See the appendix for two tables identifying the results of the journals from those two studies.

The majority of ABC respondents to the second survey identified the top six journals for career-enhancing publication as Academy of Manage-ment Journal (AMJ), Academy of Management Review (AMR), Journal of Business and Technical Communication (JBTC), Journal of Business Communication (JBC), Management Communication Quarterly (MCQ), and Administrative Science Quarterly (ASQ). With 153 surveys returned in the second study, the response rate was 16.9%; however, only 131 ques-tionnaires were usable for a final response rate of 13.4%.

To assist potential authors choose a “best fit” outlet for an article, analysis of other disciplines’ journal assessment publications determined an author would want to know the disciplines or field discussed in articles published in the journals, the length of the articles they accepted, the dis-ciplines of the authors they accepted, the number of references that were used in articles published, and the statistical and research methods as well as sample sizes used when appropriate. Significant differences resulted




between some of the pairs of journals. Some of these journals show a preference for empirical papers, whereas at least one publishes primarily theory pieces. Yet some journals would accept either. This knowledge helps an author determine the best outlet for an article and improve author submission outcomes. A discussion of characteristics of each of the six journals follows in the analysis section.

The analysis involved each article in the six journals over 11 years of publication (1996-2007). Two of the authors did their initial article analy-sis and review work together in the library to insure that both used the same recording methods. The total number of articles reviewed across journals was 2,078. A third individual analyzed the data to determine any discrepancies between coders, rechecked journal articles if a question arose, and decided the final coding. The intercoder reliability was 95%. After coding the data, it was entered into an Excel file. The coding fol-lowed analysis suggestions from Denzin and Lincoln’s (2000) Handbook of Qualitative Research. The coding of the features allowed for the obser-vation of the data across the six journals over an 11-year period. Through the coding and analysis, we developed a research-based outcome of pub-lication possibility concerning the six journals and their applicability to the BMOC discipline. This analysis determined the journals most likely to publish BMOC articles.

ANALYSIS

A number of statistical methods are used to determine significance including ANOVA, chi-square, GLM, descriptive statistics, and post hoc tests. All significance reported is at the .05 level.

Article Discipline

Article Discipline describes the area of topic focus such as ethics, impres-sion management, international business, communication, legal environ-ment, intercultural communication, and so on. Article discipline preference in a journal tells an author whether or not the article is likely to be accepted for publication based on the subject matter of the article. If a journal pub-lishes very few articles from BMOC, then less likelihood exists for authors to expect that journal to accept their article.

The results of the chi-square test indicated significance, χ2 = (250, N = 2,077) = 2177.032, p < .000. Crosstabs showed result differences. AMJ published 41.2% of the management-oriented articles, with AMR




accounting for 32.9%. Writers of articles with an international business focus should submit to either AMJ (with 48.8%) or AMR (with 36.9%). Articles with an intercultural communication focus appeared most fre-quently in either JBTC (40.7%) or MCQ (44.4%), with AMJ (7.4%) and JBC (7.4%) having few articles.

In reviewing the article discipline of Communication, which is of inter-est to BMOC researchers, over the 11 years only 9 communication articles appeared in AMJ, 17 in AMR, and 2 in ASQ, whereas 108 appeared in JBTC, 138 in JBC, and 129 in MCQ. Therefore, a researcher has a much higher probability of submission acceptance with an article having a com-munication focus when submitting to JBTC, JBC, or MCQ than the other three journals. The article discipline of Human Resources most often appeared in AMJ, AMR, ASQ, and MCQ with very few articles having that focus in the other two journals.

Length of Articles

Chi-square testing the differences in length of articles showed signifi-cance, χ2 = (25, N = 2,078) = 734.365, p < .000. Crosstab results for page length and journal found the majority of AMJ’s (64.2%) and AMR’s (57.0%) articles length of 11 to 20 pages. Other journals showed no majority for page length but the largest percentage(s) for each included the following: JBTC, 21 to 30 at 31.9% and 11 to 20 at 31.4%; JBC, 21 to 30 at 39.7% with 11 to 20 at 33.5%; ASQ, 21 to 30 at 44.0% and 31 to 40 at 45.2%; and MCQ, 1 to 10 with 32.8%.

During the period of 1996 to 2007, AMJ and AMR significantly reduced the length of their articles, overall publishing shorter pieces. Also, AMJ and AMR generally publish six issues a year versus the four-issue format that the other journals use. Both authors while reading the articles in AMR and AMJ noted shorter literature reviews as well as shorter summaries, conclusions, and recommendations at the end of the articles than those in the other journals. Articles in AMJ intertwined literature with the analysis in empirical pieces.

Number of References

Of the 2,078 articles reviewed, the number of references cited in an article differed significantly. The ANOVA results showed significance, F(df = 5, df = 2,072) = 113.857, p < .000, with 692 articles in the reference range of 0 to 10, 458 articles in the range 11 to 50, 191 articles in the range




51 to 100, 224 articles in the range 101 to 150, 265 articles in the range 151 to 200, and 248 articles with more than 200 references.

The crosstabs showed ASQ (60.5%), AMJ (54.9%), AMR (50%), and MCQ (35.1%) most likely to contain articles with 51 to 100 references. Percentages for journals having articles with 11 to 50 references included JBTC (67.0%), JBC (55.4%), and MCQ (44.2%).

The articles with the most references tended to be theoretical articles. Overall, AMR, AMJ, and ASQ included significantly more references per article, especially in the earlier years than JBTC, MCQ, or JBC. When AMR and AMJ went to the shorter article format, the number of references per article dropped.

Discipline of Authors and Number of Authors per Article

The data tracked up to eight authors for each article. Only two articles (both in AMJ) included more than eight authors. A significant difference existed between the authors’ discipline and the journal, χ2 = (330, N = 2,073) = 2444.571, p < .000.

All articles contained in the study’s journals had at least one author credited (no anonymous articles were published). Furthermore, author to article comparison indicated two authors listed for 1,432 articles; three authors for 610 articles; four authors for 171 articles; five authors for 37 articles; six authors for 15 articles; seven authors for 7 articles; and eight authors for 8 articles.

The largest group of authors published articles in the discipline area of management with 1,168, in AMJ, AMR, and ASQ. JBTC, JBC, and MCQ most likely published authors whose discipline was Communication. These results confirmed the expectations of the authors.

Table 1. Journals by Author Discipline

Author Discipline AMJ AMR JBTC JBC MCQ ASQ Total

Business administration 133 85 0 7 7 6 238Communication 2 5 82 150 224 7 470Management 594 308 8 53 33 172 1,168Organizational behavior 163 137 11 20 34 63 428Strategic management 147 96 0 0 0 4 247

Note: AMJ = Academy of Management Journal; AMR = Academy of Management Review; JBTC = Journal of Business and Technical Communication; JBC = Journal of Business Communication; MCQ = Management Communication Quarterly; ASQ = Administrative Science Quarterly.




Table 1 shows counts of the top five author disciplines by journal.Although some diversity exists among BMOC authors published in

the management journals of AMJ, AMR, and ASQ, those journals reflect publications by authors from business academic areas rather than areas of communication, business education, or other units considered to be service or support. It is much more likely that authors in communication, business education, and so on, published in JBC, JBTC, or MCQ. AMJ, AMR, and ASQ account for only 2.97% of the 470 communication arti-cles published over the 11-year period, with 97.03% of all BMOC articles published in JBC, JBTC, or MCQ, greatly reducing the likelihood of acceptance in one of the traditional management area journals.

Statistical Methods Used

The statistical methods used varied significantly across the journals. The results of the chi-square test showed significance, χ2 = (220, N = 2,014) = 2790.652, p <.000.

Table 2 looks at the top 10 statistical methods the six journals used. Many research-based articles used more than one statistical method, with many names given for regression tests. Our final coding lumped all regres-sion types into one category. Asking and answering this question showed readers the types of statistical methods the six journals used, since a par-ticular journal may expect certain statistics in a research article submitted.

Frequency counts showed that in 2,013, a large majority of the articles used at least one statistical measurement; 936 articles used two methods;

Table 2. Top 10 Statistical Methods by Journal

Statistical Method AMJ AMR JBTC JBC MCQ ASQ Total

Descriptive 445 1 39 58 37 170 750Correlation 507 0 3 28 23 119 680Modeling/theory 133 467 18 0 11 19 646Regression 420 0 0 12 102 20 554Factor analysis 73 0 2 23 20 24 142Chi-square 97 0 1 7 10 16 131Content analysis 54 0 22 6 18 11 111Discrete time logic analysis 3 0 31 47 0 57 108Interactions/post hoc tests 68 0 0 0 2 9 75Standard deviation 0 0 0 3 20 49 72





695 articles used three methods; 348 articles used four methods; 121 articles used five methods; 32 articles used six methods; 13 articles used seven methods; and 6 articles used eight different statistical measurements. However, AMR showed only modeling/theory as the primary methodology in 467 of its articles.

Table 2 allows you to see very quickly that AMJ and ASQ researchers included greater varieties of statistical analysis in their articles. Research-ers publishing in AMJ used regression, correlation, and descriptive statis-tics heavily, whereas only AMJ, JBC, and JBTC included articles with discrete time logic analysis. BMOC authors need to know journal prefer-ence for statistical methods when considering article submissions. If sub-mitting an article to AMJ or ASQ, consider using more than one statistical method in analysis. Likewise, having written a theory piece, appropriate journal choices include AMR or JBTC. Possible publication outlets choice for either quantitative or qualitative communication-oriented articles include both MCQ and JBC.

Research Methods Used

The chi-square test show significant differences between the journals on the research methodology, χ2 = (75, N = 2,046) = 2136.388, p < .000.

Of the 12 research methods coded, theory became the largest single research method published. Again, AMR, a theory-based journal, greatly influenced the results with 458 of 688. ASQ included the largest number

Table 3. Research Methods Used by Journal

Research Method AMJ AMR JBTC JBC MCQ ASQ Total

Theory 33 458 48 26 68 55 688Questionnaire 317 0 15 62 52 71 517Historical analysis 156 1 69 52 38 84 400Interview 88 0 29 35 47 59 258Database 169 0 1 0 3 29 202Observation 66 0 30 17 24 28 165Content analysis 4 0 10 38 83 1 136Case study 29 0 15 16 23 22 105Experiment 33 0 21 15 10 11 90Model 27 0 7 10 13 32 89Coding 32 0 9 12 10 1 64Ethnography 7 0 6 6 3 18 40





(18) using ethnography, the least common methodology found in only 40 articles as shown in Table 3.

AMR published no articles with only questionnaire usage, although in JBC the methodology was used frequently. Performing research with existing databases most frequently appeared in AMJ and ASQ. Historical analysis resulted as one of the leading research methods published in JBC. MCQ published content analysis, theory, questionnaire, and interview research methods most often. All journals except AMR published case studies evenly. Depending on the type of research method used in their analysis, authors can look at this chart to decide where the best opportu-nity exists for getting their piece accepted for publication. Although we did not analyze the statistics using editor by research method, the authors observed some editors seemed to favor certain research methods. A review of recent publications in a journal provides a writer with knowl-edge of present editor preferences.

Sample Sizes

Chi-square showed a significant difference between the journals on sample size, χ2 = (60, N = 2,050) = 1412.746, p < .000. AMJ and ASQ showed similar sample sizes, as did JBC, JBTC, and MCQ. Table 4 shows the sample size ranges by journal.

Depending on the type of research method used in their analysis, authors can look at this chart to decide where the best opportunity exists for getting their piece accepted for publication.

With the exception of one piece, AMR articles included no data sam-ples due to its primarily conceptual focus. Although the majority did use sampling, approximately 42% of the articles did not include a sample-based research method. Data samples tended to be more than 100, with the majority (67.9%) of the 1,177 samples using 101 or more. Looking at this table, one can see AMJ tended to have larger data sets; however, all the journals except AMR accepted articles with data sets of varying sizes.

A significant difference exists between whether the articles published used qualitative, quantitative, or both, χ2 = (15, N = 2,079) = 1627.231,




Table 4. Sample Size Ranges by Journal

Sample Size AMJ AMR JBTC JBC MCQ ASQ Total

0 32 457 94 90 157 40 8701-50 63 0 45 40 46 36 23051-100 74 0 15 20 17 21 147101-200 155 0 4 28 26 26 239201-300 90 1 1 15 3 18 128301-400 43 0 1 7 6 16 73401-500 31 0 3 13 1 19 66501-600 36 0 0 2 3 7 48601-1,000 44 0 3 7 4 15 731,001+ 117 0 2 2 2 50 173


p < .000. Qualitative articles accounted for 906 of the articles; quantitative articles totaled 212. However, 960 articles included both qualitative and quantitative analyses.

AMJ published 92.9% of its articles with both types of analyses; AMR published 98.5% qualitative; JBTC, 77% qualitative and 23% both; JBC, 49.6% qualitative, 19.2% quantitative, and 31.3% both; MCQ, 30.9% quantitative, 40.4% qualitative, and 28.7% both; and ASQ, 48.4% both, 26.6% qualitative, and 25% quantitative. Although not a lone factor when selecting a journal for submission of an article, in combination with other factors such as author discipline and number of pages, knowledge of the percentages of qualitative or quantitative pieces published does have some relevance to BMOC members.

Editors

All journals had four to seven regular editors during the period 1996 to 2007, with AMR having seven, MCQ six, AMJ and JBC five, and JBTC and ASQ four. However, the number of articles editors reviewed and pub-lished varied considerably in recent years due to AMJ and AMR going for the shorter article page length, with more articles per issue as well as additional special issues each year.

Although journal analyses showed limited publication of BMOC arti-cles historically, under a certain editor they showed a higher probability of acceptance. A significant difference existed between editors and the article disciplines that they published. Only one AMJ editor published




articles focused on communication for his tenure, with 61.3% of his articles being communication related. Six other AMJ editors ranged from 0% to 26.4% in publishing BMOC articles. AMR offered the lowest pub-lication opportunity, with 0% to 3.4% of all articles over the period pub-lished in the area of communication. JBTC published BMOC-related articles in a range from 14.3% in one issue to 100% of its articles in a special issue. JBC included 50% to 76% of the articles focused in the discipline area of communication, with BMOC teaching articles coded as education articles. MCQ editors published between 39.1% and 100% (100% was a special issue) of the articles in the area of BMOC. ASQ had two editors with 0% and the other two had 1% and 1.9% of their total articles published in the field. Only editors of communication-related journals tended to have several years with a majority of communication-focused articles. Therefore, knowledge of the editor’s preference of article focus when deciding on journal submission appeared important.

CONCLUSIONS

Pressure does exist on BMOC academicians housed in colleges and schools of business, particularly in management departments, to publish in journals considered top ones by management professors, namely, AMJ, AMR, and ASQ (Cyphert, 2009). However, only JBTC, JBC, and MCQ appear to be viable “always consider” targets for BMOC submission acceptance based on the other three journals’ publication of so few com-munication-focused articles. The majority of articles in those management journals favored management-oriented ones. Some editors prefer certain article disciplines, since a few of the journals show a significant difference when comparing their different editors. Given the traditionally low per-centage of BMOC articles accepted by AMJ, AMR, and ASQ, these jour-nals create challenges for BMOC faculty focusing on communication in business topics. Those journals rarely publish communication articles, nor do they tend to publish authors who have a communication background. Adding timely management topics to our communication themes may improve the likelihood of acceptance for publication of our articles in primarily management journals.

Citing BMOC journals in articles within journals already listed in SSCI improves their citation rate. Business communication academicians can collaborate with management professors to develop a communication-oriented piece with management theory including citations from our BMOC journals. The article, when submitted to one of their journals




already listed in SSCI, improves the overall perception of our journals. Always citing previous BMOC journal articles improves journal credibil-ity to outsiders. Members of ABC housed in business are challenged to produce research with characteristics comparable to those published in AMJ, AMR, and ASQ. Creating theory development publications for our BMOC journals, such as JBC, JBTC, and MCQ, can possibly improve their ratings in Cabell’s as well as the journals’ perceived value within the business academic community. Submitting a theory piece to AMR could bring communication in business to the attention of its present editor, pos-sibly improving chances of publication and greater recognition of busi-ness communication by academicians in the management field.

Given the pressure to publish in the “top” journals, it is imperative that BMOC authors work to get JBTC and JBC on the SSCI with MCQ. Most business schools or colleges use that rating system to determine an aca-demic journal’s rank within the departmental accepted publications for faculty. The acceptance rates for all six journals according to Cabell (2004) are AMR, 6% to 10%; AMJ, 3%; JBC, 12% to 15%; ASQ, 11% to 20%; MCQ, 13%; and JBTC, 25%. Therefore, to improve the Association’s jour-nal ratings, BMOC authors need to cite BMOC journal articles in new papers submitted for publication in any academic journal listed in SSCI. The higher citations count is vital to improving ABC journal recognition.

Coe and Weinstock (1984), when discussing publications by faculty in management journals, made the following statement:

As with the journals of any enduring discipline, the management journals have developed varying images of quality or prestige. These images influ-ence a variety of behaviors in the university setting. Faculty performance is assessed, in part, by evaluating their publications in appropriate journals. Decisions regarding salary, tenure, and rank are heavily influenced by such evaluations. The content of publications may be less relevant than the images of the journals in which they appear because decisions are made by committees and administrators outside of the individual’s discipline. More-over, the intrinsic merits of journal articles may not become apparent until years after their initial publication. For a full comprehension of university performance appraisal and reward systems, therefore, one must obtain insights into the images of the journals in the various disciplines. (p. 660)

Perceptions of journals become very important in evaluating individual faculty member’s achievements. As Cyphert (2009) noted, “We are gener-ally isolated from our colleagues who value our research, which causes others to focus on our pedagogy” and “Our colleagues have no idea what else we do” (p. 270). Improving our success in publishing in “top” journals




will provide greater visibility for our discipline as well as change the way academicians from other disciplines perceive the journals in which their BMOC colleagues publish. Those two outcomes can also provide a con-crete foundation for employment as well as promotion or tenure decisions made by department chairs or deans.

APPENDIXJournals Appropriate for BMOC Articles (Study 1)

JournalNumber of

Respondents (N = 163)

Journal of Business Communication 144Business Communication Quarterly 140Management Communication Quarterly 135Journal of Business & Technical Communication 131Communication Quarterly 104Communication Research 101Journal of Technical Writing & Communication 100Human Communication Research 95Journal of Communication 94Organizational Behavior & Decision Processes 94Communication Monographs 85Communication Theory 80Technical Communication Quarterly 77Communication Research Reports 76International Journal of Conflict Management 74Groups and Organization Studies 73Western Journal of Communication 73Communication Education 71Written Communication 71International Journal of Intercultural Relations 61IEEE Transaction on Professional Communication 60Quarterly Journal of Speech 53Women’s Studies in Communication 52Public Relations Review 50Speech Communication 50Communication 46Language and Communication 44Educational Technology Research and Development 40Journal of Social & Personal Relations 40Critical Studies in Mass Communication 37Media, Culture, and Society 35Journalism Quarterly 33Telecommunications Policy 32Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media 29Academy of Management Journala 16Journal of Applied Communication Researcha 16

(continued)




APPENDIX (CONTINUED)

JournalNumber of

Respondents (N = 163)

Business Education Foruma 15Delta Pi Epsilon Journala 14Academy of Management Reviewa 13Administrative Science Quarterlya 12College Composition and Communicationa 10Organization Sciencea 9Communication Studies 7Journal of Education for Businessa 7Journal of International Listening Association 7Journal of Technical Communication 7College Englisha 6Information Systems Researcha 6Journal of Marketing Communication 5Harvard Business Reviewa 4Academy of Management Executivea 3Journal of Applied Psychologya 3MIS Quarterlya 2NABTE Review 2Organizationa 2Career Development Internationala 1Corporate Communication an International Journala 1Executive Developmenta 1Journal of Contemporary Ethnographya 1Journal of Small Group Behaviora 1Management Decisiona 1Psychological Reportsa 1Qualitative Inquirya 1Strategic Directiona 1Studies in Organization Behaviora 1Symbolic Interactiona 1Training for Qualitya 1Public Opinion Quarterly 1

a. Journals added by respondents.

Top 16 Journals Perceived as Publications for Professional Advancement (Survey 2)

Journals (Ordered by Weighted Mean) Valid Cases Sum Weighted Mean

Academy of Management Journala 67 117 1.7463Academy of Management Reviewa 61 109 1.7869Administrative Science Quarterlya 52 104 2.0000Journal of Business Communication 115 250 2.1739Management Communication Quarterly 64 141 2.2031Journal of Business & Technical Communication 76 172 2.2632

(continued)




APPENDIX (CONTINUED)

Journals (Ordered by Weighted Mean) Valid Cases Sum Weighted Mean

Communication Monographsa 49 117 2.3878Organizational Behavior & Decision Processesa 28 68 2.4286Communication Researcha 43 108 2.5116Delta Pi Epsilon Journala 69 174 2.5217Communication Theorya 29 74 2.5517Human Communication Researcha 38 103 2.7105Journal of Communicationa 42 110 2.6190Quarterly Journal of Speecha 24 64 2.6667Technical Communication Quarterly 35 94 2.6857Business Communication Quarterly 127 359 2.8268

a. Included in Social Science Citation Index.

REFERENCES

Bohrer, P., & Dolphin, R. (1985). Expectations and support for scholarly activity in schools of business. Journal of Education for Business, 61(3), 101-105.

Browne, W., & Becker, B. (1985). Perceptions of marketing journals: Awareness and quality evaluations. In 1985 AMA Educator’s Conference Proceeding. Chicago, IL: American Marketing Association.

Cabell, D. W. E. (2004). Cabell’s directory of publishing opportunities in management (9th ed.). Beaumont, TX: Cabell.

Coe, R., & Weinstock, I. (1984). Evaluating the management journals: A second look. Academy of Management Journal, 27, 660-666.

Cyphert, D. (2009). Who we are and what we do, 2008. Journal of Business Communica-tion, 46, 262-274.

Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (2000). Handbook of qualitative research (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.

Fry, E., Walters, G., & Scheurmann, L. (1985). Perceived quality of fifty selected journals: Academicians and practitioners. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 13, 352-361.

Graham, M. B., & Thralls, C. (1998). Connections and fissures: Discipline formation in business communication. Journal of Business Communication, 35(1), 7-13.

Grinois, A. B. (2010). Who we are and what we do, 2008: A response. Journal of Business Communication, 47, 63-68.

Krapels, R. H., & Arnold, V. D. (1996). The legitimacy of business communication. Journal of Business Communication, 33, 331-352.

McCullough, C. D., Wooten, J. A. R., & Ryan, J. A. (1981). Research and publication programs in collegiate schools of business: A faculty development approach. Journal of Business Education, 57, 46-49.

Pierce, B., & Garvin, G. (1995). Publishing international business research: A survey of leading journals. Journal of International Business Studies, 26(1), 69-90.

Rentz, K. (2009). The importance of “niche” journals to new business communication academics—and to all of us. Journal of Business Communication, 46, 404-411.




Reinsch, N. L., & Reinsch, J. W. (1996). Some assessments of business communication scholarship from social science citations. Journal of Business and Technical Commu-nication, 10, 28-47.

Rogers, P. S., Campbell, N., Louhiala-Salminen, L., Rentz, K., & Suchan, J. (2007). The impact of perceptions of journal quality on business and management communication academics. Journal of Business Communication, 44, 403-426.

Russell, R. L., Jr. (1999). Testing for correlation between two journal ranking methods: A comparison of citation rankings and expert opinion rankings (ED435 396). Unpub-lished master’s thesis, Kent State University, Ohio.

Shelby, A. (1996). A discipline orientation: Analysis and critique. Management Communi-cation Quarterly, 10(1), 98-105.



journal of business communication 2012 martin 3 20

Documents

administrative science quarterly

management communication quarterly

business communication quarterly

business faculty perceive

publish bmoc articles

bmoc faculty

business communication

technical communication