Toward a better understanding of the Australian Business Deans Council (ABDC) list and its rankings

Abstract

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to evaluate the variables that drive the rating within the Australian Business Deans Council (ABDC) list. The list is used in so many different ways throughout academic research that a better understanding of its component parts is essential. Design/methodology/approach The 2016 list was used as a base and additional variables added. The resulting database was subjected to statistical analysis using the PLS methodology. Findings The overall finding is that the most significant driver of the ratings system is the impact factor. When this number is not available, the Cabell’s rating may be a weaker proxy. Research limitations/implications The researchers used a set of additional variables that were limited in nature. Other variables not included in the study may be included in later work and be found to have some correlation with the ABDC rating. Originality/value Given the use of the ABDC list and the paucity of work in this area, the reported research may have significant value; especially for authors working in areas where journals are “crossover” in nature.