Developing Benchmarks to Assess Accounting Faculty Research Standards:

• In Event: Ice Cream Social with ELS Posters, Emerging Research and Research Interaction Forum
  In Poster Session: Effective Learning Strategies (ELS)

Abstract

For nearly a decade the Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of Business (AACSB) has asked its member schools to consider research benchmarks for its faculty based upon journal lists from “peer and aspirational schools. Many studies have examined faculty perceptions of journal quality, using such methods as surveying faculty perceptions of journal quality (e.g., Schroeder et al., 1988; Hull and Wright, 1990; Hall and Ross, 1991 Johnson et al., 2002; Herron, T. L., and T. W. Hall. 2004; Ballas and Theoharakis, 2003); faculty downloads of the SSCI data base or other measures of citation (e.g., Brown, 1996; Beattie and Ryan, 1989) or “counting” faculty publications using benchmarks from other studies (e.g., Glover et al., 2006; Glover et al., 2012; Hasselback et al. 2013). But few studies (e.g., Reinstein and Calderon, 2006) have examined the actual journal benchmarks of nationwide accounting programs.
Based upon input from five urban universities, seven regional schools offering doctoral degrees in accounting, five regional schools not offering degrees in accounting, 13 national schools offering doctoral degrees in accounting; and six national schools that do not offer doctoral degrees in accounting, we detail five classes of journal rankings. Such categories include A+, A, A-, B and C rankings for each of these 36 programs (including there programs that use no journal rankings) for approximately 100 journals. We summarize these findings and present conclusions to help accounting departments develop their own journal rankings.

Authors

• Alan Reinstein, Wayne State University

• Mohammad J Abdolmohammadi, Bentley University