Forums for MIS scholars

W here should I publish my scholarly research? is a question often heard in academic circles. On the surface this appears to be a trivial question. However, when one considers the vast number of journals available, the pressure on faculty to publish, and the impact of publishing on promotion and tenure, the question no longer seems trivial. As early as 1983, Hamilton and Ives [6] noted that the abundance of journals and long publication lead times made it important to identify journal quality so researchers know where to submit their work. Many parties other than MIS faculty have an interest in the quality ratings of MIS publication outlets: (1) selection, promotion, and tenure committees seeking to secure and retain the best faculty [3, 7]; (2) journal editors and associates seeking to raise the quality of their journals [12]; (3) students of the discipline seeking to gain an understanding of the field [6, 11]; (4) members of the MIS field as it continues to mature as a discipline [6, 11]; and (5) librarians seeking to invest wisely their ever-decreasing funds [12]. Overall, the determination of journal quality helps to further the MIS discipline. Several studies have evaluated the quality of MIS publication outlets. However, as Gillenson and Stutz [5] note: “earlier studies addressed the issue of MIS journals in a variety of ways, no two quite the same.” An assortment of methods has been used to assess journal quality. Some have used a numeric scale to assign ratings to various journals [5, 6, 12]. Others have asked respondents to rank the journals in some fashion [3, 7]. Most of the studies asked a crosssection of MIS faculty to evaluate the journals [3, 6, 7, 12]; although at least one polled specific members of the MIS faculty such as department chairs or senior faculty [5]. The only thing these studies have in common is that they all attempt to do the same thing—identify the quality of journals. The study described in this article is a follow-up and update to the 1991 study by Walstrom et al. [12], using the same population and data collection instrument; thus allowing a direct comparison to be made between the findings in this study and those of the 1991 study. MIS faculty in the U.S. and Canada were asked to rate 53 journals according to their appropriateness as publication outlets and 11 conferences according to their value to the MIS field. Over 350 responses were received—by far the largest sample for this type of