A Comparative Analysis of Why Papers Are Rejected in Management Journals of Different Strata

Abstract The publication of scientific articles is one of the requirements imposed on Brazilian researchers and contributes decisively to their reputation, mobility and financial benefits. To assess the quality of publications, Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior (CAPES) created the Qualis system, that classifies journals into eight levels - A1 (highest) to C (lowest) - inferring the quality of the articles from the strata of the journals in which they are published. This article examines the flaws and gaps that represent factors for rejecting articles submitted to management journals, comparing the motives for rejection between journals from different strata. Methodologically, we conducted an empirical study with data obtained by questionnaire from 82 editors of Brazilian management journals. Contrary to expectations, the results do not point to clear differences in the factors that lead to rejection between journals from different strata. This article has contributions and implications for researchers, publishers and regulators. In particular, the thoughtful reader can identify the most frequent problems and gaps and be more prepared to produce better articles for future submissions.

摘要 学术论文发表是巴西科研人员需满足的硬性要求之一，且对其学术声誉、职业流动与经济收益均具有决定性影响。为评估学术成果质量，巴西高等教育人员发展协调局（Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior，CAPES）推出了Qualis分类体系（Qualis system），将期刊划分为从最高级A1到最低级C共八个等级，并依据刊载论文的期刊所属层级推断论文质量。本文聚焦管理学期刊投稿论文遭拒的相关缺陷与不足，对比了不同层级期刊的拒稿动机差异。在研究方法上，本研究通过向巴西管理学期刊的82位编辑发放问卷收集数据，开展了一项实证研究。与预期相悖的是，研究结果显示不同层级期刊的拒稿影响因素并无显著差异。本文可为科研人员、期刊出版机构及监管部门提供理论参考与实践启示。具体而言，细致的读者可梳理出本领域最常见的问题与不足，从而为后续提交更优质的论文做好更充分的准备。