Letter from the Editors: Journal Status, 2008

We hope you had a productive summer, or winter, for those of you south of the equator. As we start the next academic year, we want provide you with the annual update on the status of the JOM as well as announcing this year’s award winners. In general, the JOM continues to do very well as the leading journal in theory-driven, empirically based research of operations management. Recent citation impact factor scores place the JOM among the top OM research outlets. The most recent (2007) impact factor is 1.85, this means that the average article published in JOM is cited nearly two times in the 2 years following its publication. Fig. 1 shows the trends for four leading OM journals, indicating that JOM is consistently at or near the top of the list. The impact factor includes citations from over 30 different journals. The JOM scores include less than 20% self-citations (i.e. citations from JOM to other articles published in JOM), indicating that JOM is widely cited by journals both in OM and other fields. Impact factor trends for JOM and other top OM journals (with self-citations removed). Submissions to the journal continue to be strong in both quantity and quality. The submissions address a wide set of operations management issues, integrating a rich set of theoretical perspectives and research methodologies. As editors, we are excited by the growing quality and diversity of the papers that are being submitted. At the same time, we are always looking for opportunities to expand the readership and potential author base. We welcome suggestions for ways to expand the journal. Reviewing continues to be both a strength and a challenge for the journal. We greatly appreciate the timely, high-quality reviews provided by many of our reviewers. The average paper submitted to JOM receives comments from three to four reviewers, including an associate editor. This breadth of review is superior to most other journals. Nevertheless, finding reliable reviewers continues to be difficult for some papers. We encourage you to make reviewing a priority. Serving as a reviewer gives you the first look at cutting edge research. It also gives you a significant opportunity to advance the OM field as a whole by sharing your expertise and critical insights with other researchers. If you currently are not a reviewer for JOM, but would like to be, contact us. If you are currently on the JOM review list but do not wish to be, then let us know. Help us to become more efficient by removing yourself from the reviewer list if you are unable to serve in this way. At the 2008 Academy of Management national conference we announced the winners of the annual journal awards. We selected six candidate papers for the 2007 Best Paper from the six journal issues published in 2007. Then these candidate papers were ranked independently by doctoral students in courses at Michigan State University and the University of South Carolina. The top three papers were distributed to three associate editors for the JOM, who then ranked the papers. In both ranking processes, the participants evaluated the papers using criteria including the quality of the paper’s contribution to OM theory, clarity of presentation, and methodological rigor. Each of the best paper winners received a plaque and a cash award ranging from $2500 for the winner to $1250 for each of the finalists. “Outsourcing Impact on Manufacturing Firms’ Value: Evidence from Japan,” Bin Jiang, James A. Belohlav and Scott T. Young. Vol. 25, Issue 4 (June 2007) “Exploring retailers’ sensitivity to local sustainability policies,” Hans J. Quak and M.B.M. de Koster. Vol. 25, Issue 6 (November 2007) “Linking e-service quality and markups: The role of imperfect information in the supply chain,” Elliot Rabinovich. Vol. 25, Issue 1 (January 2007) Our selection of the best AE and reviewers for the 2008 year was based on an analysis of reviews and reviewer performance data provided by the Elsevier Editorial System. In order to qualify for the best reviewer reward, a reviewer had to have completed at least three reviews in the year, with no late reviews. We selected top reviewers from this candidate list based on the quality of the reviews submitted. Each of these reviewers and the AE received a plaque and an honorarium ranging from $200 to $500. Christopher Craighead, Pennsylvania State University Gopesh Anand, University of Illinois at Urbana Champaign Giovani da Silveira, University of Calgary Hale Kaynak, University of Texas, Pan American Adegoke Oke, Arizona State University Zhaohui Wu, Oregon State University We are pleased to announce changes to the JOM review boards. First, we want to welcome the following people as new Associate Editors: Giovani da Silveira, University of Calgary Joy Field, Boston College Daniel Guide, Pennsylvania State University Larry Menor, University of Western Ontario Susan Meyer Goldstein, University of Minnesota Eve Rosenzweig, Emory University Gregory Stock, University of Colorado at Colorado Springs Zhaohui Wu, Oregon State University In addition, we welcome the following people as new members of the Editorial Review Board: Craig Froehle, University of Cincinnati Michael Gorman, University of Dayton Gregory Heim, Texas A&M University Jan Holmstrom, Helsinki University of Technology, Espoo, Finland DaeSoo Kim, Korea University Business School Benn Lawson, Queen’s University Belfast Adegoke Oke, Arizona State University Lloyd Rinehart, University of Tennessee Christian Rossetti, North Carolina State University Paul Skilton, Arizona State University Polytechnic Rui Sousa, Universidade Catolica Portuguesa Jeff Stratman, University of Utah Mohan Tatikonda, Indiana University Anita Tucker, Harvard Business School Fynn Wynstra, Erasmus University Andy Yeung, Hong Kong Polytechnic University In addition, the following ad hoc reviewers have assisted in providing reviews in the past year. In conclusion, we believe the journal is in excellent shape and want to express our deepest appreciation for your participation as authors, reviewers, associate editors and readers. Let us keep up the good work! Best regards, (K. K. Boyer)

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.