Journal list fetishism and the perversion of scholarship: reactivity and the ABS list

Abstract

The case for using academic journals lists is critically scrutinised. An effect of their use, it argued, is to stifle diversity and constrict scholarly innovation. A monoculture is fostered in which a preoccupation with shoehorning research into a form prized by elite, US-oriented journals overrides a concern to maintain and enrich the diversity of topics, the range of methods and the plurality of perspectives engaged in business and management research. Use of a particular journal list, such as the one prepared by the Association of Business Schools (ABS), can come to dominate the scholarly terrain of a particular discipline with consequences that can be damaging to funding as well as to research culture.