The ABDC Journal Quality List is a ranking of business and management journals maintained by the Australian Business Deans Council. Journals are graded A*, A, B or C, based on discipline-panel assessment rather than citation metrics alone. It is discipline-specific: a journal can be Scopus-indexed and absent from ABDC, or ABDC-listed and outside Scopus entirely.
Four tiers only — A*, A, B, C. There is no "A+" category.
Ratings are assigned within a Field of Research (FoR) panel, not across the whole list.
The current full review is the 2025 Journal Quality List, released March 2026 — the first full review since 2019.
Verify any journal directly at abdc.edu.au using its ISSN, since titles can change and old claims circulate.
Everything on this page in one table — service, coverage, and how to reach us.
| Service | ABDC journal selection and manuscript preparation |
| Suitable for | Management, commerce, finance and economics scholars |
| Rankings covered | A*, A, B and C listed journals, checked against the 2025 ABDC Journal Quality List |
| Support includes | Journal shortlisting, manuscript editing, formatting, submission preparation, reviewer-response support |
| Originality | Turnitin similarity report delivered alongside your finished manuscript |
| Related support | Scopus-indexed journal support · Web of Science journal support |
| Talk to us | WhatsApp: +91 87547 14627 |
Go to abdc.edu.au and open the Journal Quality List.
Search by journal title or ISSN — the ISSN is more reliable, since titles change.
Note the ranking and the year of the list. ABDC reviews periodically and rankings move.
A journal ranked A in one field may sit differently in another.
Released March 2026 — the first full review of the entire list since 2019. Some journals advertise a rating from a superseded edition; verifying directly at abdc.edu.au is the simplest way to catch that before you invest preparation time.
Why it matters now
The 2025 ABDC Journal Quality List review moved a meaningful number of titles — additions, removals, upgrades, downgrades, and reclassifications to different Field of Research panels.
If you shortlisted target journals some time ago, it's worth re-checking their current status using the verification steps above before investing further preparation time.
If your field-of-research area was affected by the review, journals that weren't previously viable ABDC targets may now be worth considering — or one you were counting on may have been removed.
We factor the current 2025 list into every shortlist we build, rather than relying on cached knowledge of where a journal used to sit.
The systems overlap substantially but not completely. If your university accepts more than one, checking each widens your options considerably.
| ABDC | Scopus | |
|---|---|---|
| Maintained by | Australian Business Deans Council | Elsevier |
| Scope | Business, management, economics and related-discipline journals only | Journals across almost every academic field |
| Basis | Discipline-panel peer assessment combined with established journal metrics | Citation-based metrics (e.g. CiteScore) plus editorial-quality criteria |
| Grades | A*, A, B, C | No letter grades — percentile/quartile ranking and CiteScore instead |
A journal can be Scopus-indexed and absent from ABDC, or ABDC-listed and outside Scopus entirely. See Scopus-indexed journal support for more detail.
Web of Science, maintained by Clarivate, is a separate citation index from both ABDC and Scopus, with its own selection criteria and metrics — including the Journal Impact Factor in certain WoS indexes. ABDC rating and WoS indexing are independent: a journal may satisfy one, both, or neither.
Web of Science, maintained by Clarivate, is a separate citation index from both ABDC and Scopus, with its own selection criteria and metrics — including the Journal Impact Factor in certain WoS indexes. ABDC rating and WoS indexing are independent: a journal may satisfy one, both, or neither. See our Web of Science journal support →
Q1–Q4 quartiles typically come from citation-based rankings (Scopus CiteScore percentile or the WoS Impact Factor quartile) and reflect where a journal sits statistically within its subject category by citation performance. ABDC ratings come from a different process entirely — discipline-panel assessment specific to business-related fields. The two won't always align one-to-one; check your institution's exact requirement rather than assuming one substitutes for the other.
Chasing the highest possible rating isn't always the strategically sound choice. A paper that's a poor scope fit for an A* journal will typically face desk rejection regardless of its quality, while the same paper might be a strong submission for an A or B journal in the same field.
Do the journal's stated aims, scope, and recent published articles match your topic and theoretical lens?
Is the journal categorised under the FoR code relevant to your discipline?
Does the journal accept your manuscript type — empirical, conceptual, review, methodological, case-based?
Does your paper's theoretical, empirical, or contextual contribution match what the journal typically publishes?
Are your methods consistent with what the journal's recent issues show?
What has the journal actually published in the last one to two years?
Word count, structure, citation style — checked before you invest editing time.
Subscription, hybrid, or open-access, and whether an APC applies.
Typical expectations, where the journal publishes this information.
If your university or grant body specifies a minimum rating or discipline scope.
Not quite. The ABDC Journal Quality List is organised by Field of Research (FoR) panel — separate panels assess journals in accounting, finance, marketing, management, economics and information systems. A rating is assigned relative to other journals within that same panel, not across the whole list. An A-rated journal in one FoR panel isn't necessarily comparable, in competitiveness or scope, to an A-rated journal in a different panel. If your research crosses disciplines, it's worth checking whether the journal sits in the FoR panel your institution expects — a mismatch here is a common, avoidable source of confusion during promotion or PhD milestone reviews.
A surprising number of desk rejections have nothing to do with underlying research quality.
Reviewers should identify it in the abstract and introduction, not infer it from the discussion.
Citing the journal's recent articles signals genuine scope fit.
Relative to the journal's typical rigor.
Word count, headings, citation style, and reference errors are common, avoidable causes of delay.
A well-written letter connecting your paper to the journal's scope can meaningfully help at editorial screening.
Our manuscript assessment step catches these before submission, alongside deeper structural and argument-level feedback — the same review depth behind our manuscript writing services .
Readiness assessed alongside 2–4 realistic journal targets, so selection and preparation happen together.
Structural, language, and argument-clarity improvements, tracked and left open for your approval.
Aligning the manuscript, references, tables, figures, and cover letter with the target journal's guidelines.
Carried out by you, the author, through the journal's own portal — you retain full authorship and control.
The journal's editor checks scope fit and basic quality before sending the paper to reviewers.
Typically two or three independent reviewers assess the paper and return comments.
Accept, reject, or — most common on a first submission to a well-matched journal — a request for revisions.
If requested, we help you work through comments systematically and draft a response letter, through further review rounds until a final decision.
Structure, argument, methodology, references, and overall submission-readiness reviewed, with what needs work flagged before you target a specific journal.
Using the ten-factor framework above, we shortlist ABDC-rated journals genuinely suited to your topic and methodology — with reasoning for each recommendation.
Academic language, clarity, and structure refined with your review and approval at each stage. We do not alter your data, findings, or results.
Formatting your manuscript, references, tables, and figures to your target journal's guidelines, plus the cover letter and author declarations.
Organising reviewer comments, prioritising revisions, and drafting a clear, evidence-based point-by-point response letter.
A Turnitin similarity report delivered alongside your finished manuscript, so you can confirm originality before submission.
Rejection is a normal, common part of academic publishing and isn't always a verdict on research quality — it's often a signal about scope fit, positioning, or timing.
The editor decides, before peer review, that the paper isn't a fit for the journal's current scope. This usually means the paper needs a different target, not necessarily a rewrite.
The paper went through review and reviewers recommended against acceptance, often with detailed feedback on gaps to address.
Our rejection-analysis support looks at the available feedback (or its absence, for a desk rejection) and helps you decide between revising for the same journal type, repositioning for a different scope or rating tier, or restructuring the contribution before the next submission.
Three distinct types of cost are worth separating.
Covers assessment, selection, editing, formatting, and submission-support work — quoted individually based on your manuscript and the scope of support you need.
Some ABDC-rated journals are subscription-based with no author-facing charge; others are hybrid or open-access with an article processing fee, set by the publisher.
Some publishers apply these separately — again set by the journal, not by Zonduo.
We don't publish fixed figures for either on this page, since they vary by manuscript scope and publisher — but we'll walk you through exactly what applies to your situation before you commit to anything.
There's no fixed, universal timeline, and any service promising a guaranteed number of days should be treated with caution. Realistic timelines depend on:
Our own service-delivery commitment covers the work we control — manuscript preparation, formatting, and submission-pack turnaround. We can't control the journal's own editorial and review timeline, and won't imply otherwise.
Because "ABDC journal" is heavily searched, it also attracts misleading claims — journals or agents advertising "guaranteed ABDC A* publication," fabricated turnaround promises, or fees framed as guaranteeing acceptance.
Confirm the journal's current rating directly at abdc.edu.au using the ISSN — not a third-party claim.
Be cautious of any service promising guaranteed acceptance or "fast-track" peer review — legitimate peer review cannot be purchased or fast-tracked.
Check whether the journal's editorial board, scope, and past issues are genuine and consistent with its claimed standing.
Treat any large fee specifically to "secure" acceptance, rather than to cover legitimate editorial or open-access costs, as a serious warning sign.
Whether you need to verify a journal's current ABDC standing, choose between shortlisted options, or prepare a manuscript for submission, we can help you plan the right next step.
Tell us about your manuscript — we'll reply with next steps, not a sales script.
We start with a manuscript assessment, then build a shortlist of ABDC-rated journals genuinely suited to your topic, contribution, and methodology.
Thesis chapters are written for an examiner, not a journal audience — we help restructure the contribution statement, trim the literature review, and reframe the discussion for journal readers.
Matching scope, article type, methodology, and contribution against realistic, well-matched targets rather than a single "aspirational" choice.
Our focus narrows to formatting, reference styling, and submission-package preparation specific to that journal's author guidelines.
A surprising number of "is this journal ABDC?" questions reference an old edition of the list. We walk you through ISSN-based verification, or check it with you directly.
We help you organise feedback by theme and priority, plan revisions, and draft a clear, evidence-based point-by-point response letter.
Desk rejection or post-review decision — we help you interpret the available feedback and decide on a realistic next step.
We help you sequence realistic steps against your timeline, while being upfront that we cannot compress a journal's own editorial process.
Zonduo's ABDC service is built around the discipline-panel logic and rating structure of the ABDC Journal Quality List — it isn't a repurposed version of a general, multi-database publication page.
Not rating-chasing — journals matched to your actual paper.
Checked against the current list, not third-party claims.
No fixed-day guarantees or hidden costs.
You stay the author, and stay in control of every submission.
The ABDC Journal Quality List is a ranking of business and management journals maintained by the Australian Business Deans Council, graded A*, A, B, or C.
Search the official list at abdc.edu.au by journal title or ISSN, and note the year of the list you're checking — rankings move between review cycles, and the ISSN is more reliable than the title since titles can change.
The most recent full review is the 2025 ABDC Journal Quality List, released in March 2026 — the first full review since 2019, covering more than 2,600 journal titles.
Four tiers: A* (highest), A, B, and C. There is no "A+" category.
Not exactly. ABDC rates journal quality; Scopus and Web of Science index journal content and citations. A journal can be ABDC-rated and separately indexed in Scopus or Web of Science, but these are different systems.
There's no single figure — ABDC doesn't publish acceptance-rate data, and it varies by individual journal and field. Check the specific journal's own reporting if this matters for your planning.
Match your topic, methodology, article type, and contribution against the journal's scope and recent publications, then check author guidelines and publication charges — rather than defaulting to the highest-rated option available.
Costs fall into two categories: any service fee for professional support, and the journal's own publication charges, if any, which vary by publisher and access model.
No fixed timeline — it depends on the journal's editorial screening, review rounds, revision turnaround, and current workload.
No. Acceptance decisions are made entirely by the journal's editors and peer reviewers.
Yes — our process weighs scope, Field of Research classification, article type, contribution, methodology, and recent publications to build a genuinely suited shortlist.
We review the available feedback and help you decide whether to revise for the same journal type, reposition, or restructure before resubmitting elsewhere.
