Renewal of the FNEGE ranking
This announcement is dedicated to some lessons learned from the SIM journal's application for being ranked as a scientific journal in management sciences by the National Foundation for Business Management Education (FNEGE). We begin by presenting the context of our application, then discuss some of the highlights of our application file, particularly regarding gender equality, institutional diversity, the selectivity of published articles, the length of the editorial process, and the journal's managerial openness.
FNEGE is a French not-for-profit foundation recognized as being of public interest, whose objective is to develop and improve the quality of higher education in business management in France.
For the past fifteen years, it has published a ranking of scientific journals in management sciences. The first edition dates from December 2011. It aimed to provide a “categorization that reflects as accurately as possible the specificity of management sciences” (FNEGE Scientific Committee, 2011), in response to the publication of rankings (AERES, CNRS) that mixed economics with management. In the meantime, both the CNRS and the HCERES (successor to the AERES) have discontinued their rankings in order to comply with public policies on open science and in line with their commitment to improve methods for evaluating scientific research results in accordance with the San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment - DORA (American Society for Cell Biology, 2012). This declaration was drafted on the initiative of researchers from the American Society for Cell Biology. It proposes 18 recommendations for research organizations, funding agencies, publishers, and researchers. In particular, this statement advises against the use of journal-based indicators (such as impact factor) as a measure of the quality of research articles for the purpose of individual researcher evaluation, and encourages the exploration of new qualitative indicators of the impact of research work.
FNEGE is continuing with this approach, and the process of ranking scientific journals in management sciences is underway, with the new ranking scheduled for publication in December 2025.
As in previous versions of the FNEGE ranking, two categories of scientific journals are distinguished: journals from the French-speaking community and international, non-French-speaking journals. FNEGE includes this segmentation as part of its commitment to supporting the specific characteristics of research published in journals from the French-speaking community.
Our responses for the FNEGE rankingThis segmentation is in line with our recommendations in favor of pluralistic and inclusive science (Vitari & Leclercq-Vandelannoitte, 2025), where French-language academic output is not merely an alternative to the dominant Anglo-Saxon model, but rather an essential and indispensable complement to it. Thus, in agreement with the Association Information et Management, we responded to the FNEGE's request for a wide range of information relating to the SIM journal. The collection of the requested information led us to take a step back and review the organization of our journal and define new directions to better meet the expectations of our stakeholders, particularly with regard to gender equality, institutional diversity, the selectivity of published articles, the length of the editorial process, and the managerial openness of the journal.
Gender equalityWe note a preponderance of men on the SIM editorial board. Of the 19 members (editor-in-chief, deputy editor-in-chief, editors, editors completing their term of office, and emeritus editors), there are 12 men and 7 women on the editorial board, representing 37% of all members, with a female/male ratio of 58%. This male dominance is even more evident in the position of editor-in-chief. Since the journal's founding, all four predecessors have been men. In response to this imbalance, the latest recruitment of editorial board members has promoted two women (Sylvie Michel & Sophie Agulhon) and one man (Vincent Dutot). A gender change at the head of the journal is also in the works.
Institutional diversityThe editorial board is highly diverse in terms of institutional representation. Of the 19 members, 17 institutions are represented. However, this diversity is mainly confined to France. There are only four international members: Cédric Baudet from the Haute école de gestion Arc in Neuchâtel (Switzerland), Stéphanie Missonier from HEC Lausanne (Switzerland), Elisabetta Raguseo from the Politecnico di Torino (Italy), and Mathieu Templier from Laval University (Quebec, Canada). During the last call for applications, we were unable to attract any international candidates.
The selectivity of the journalDuring the reference period for the FNEGE ranking (September 1, 2019–September 1, 2024), we published four issues per year, each containing, on average, three scientific articles. The total number of articles accepted during the reference period was 61. This total does not include editorials or book reviews, as these do not follow the standard double-blind review process. These 61 articles were selected from 254 articles submitted during the same period, resulting in a selectivity rate of 24.02%. This selectivity rate is adjusted to exclude editorials and book reviews, as well as a few false submissions (errors/tests/bugs) recorded by the editorial management application, Open Journal System, which slightly lower the rate to 21.55%. The data from the application is used to feed the online selectivity statistics. This data is regularly updated on the journal's website. This rate of 21.55% has remained relatively stable over time. Over the entire period of use of this application, from 2009 to the present, the average selectivity rate is 21%.
The duration of the processOur application also allows us to know the duration of the editorial process, but not exactly those requested by FNEGE. These durations are also published regularly on the journal's website, as produced by the application. During the FNEGE ranking reference period, approximately 80% of submissions received an initial editorial decision, such as a desk reject or transfer for evaluation, within 141 days. The vast majority of authors submitting to the journal received an initial response within this time frame. As FNEGE does not require exactly the same time frame, we had to perform ad hoc calculations; and, in doing so, we also purged the data of a few false submissions. Over the reference period for the FNEGE ranking, the average time between the submission of an article and the first response to authors (after an initial evaluation by reviewers) was 126 days. For desk reject, the response time was 35 days on average. These averages mask a great deal of variability in response times: the standard deviation between the submission of an article and the first response to the authors (after an initial evaluation by the reviewers) was 77 days. For desk reject, the standard deviation was 57 days. However, over the same period, the median time between the submission of an article and the first response to the authors (after an initial evaluation by the reviewers) was 100 days. For desk reject, the median was 16 days. Even though the median is shorter than the average, we know that our authors would like to see all these durations reduced, and we are making this a priority for improvement. We have established a target editorial process with maximum durations for each stage and we systematically follow up with those who are late. Over the last few months, from the end of the reference period for FNEGE, approximately 80% of submissions received an initial editorial decision, such as a desk rejection or transfer for evaluation, within 21 days. Between an initial positive response and the publication of the article, there is still a long way to go. Over the period taken into account for the ranking, the average number of revisions made by authors before the final published version is 2.11. More specifically, 17.54% of articles underwent one revision. 57.89% of articles underwent two revisions. 21.05% of articles underwent three revisions. 3.51% of articles underwent four revisions.
Managerial opennessFNEGE also asked us about the “managerial openness” of the SIM journal. The FNEGE measures this openness in terms of the percentage of articles in managerial editorial formats, giving examples such as case studies, interviews, and articles co-authored by professionals. Over the five years taken into account for the ranking, the journal published nine case studies, representing approximately 15% of the 61 articles published during this period. In addition, three articles were co-published with four different professionals, representing nearly 5% of total publications. In terms of our readership, Cairn publishes usage and interest metrics for each article: number of views, number of citations, number of additions to reading lists (Cairn, 2025). The views reported on Cairn are the number of times the full text of articles has been read since 2016, in accordance with the COUNTER standard (Counter Metrics, 2025). Citations are sourced from the international Crossref directory (Crossref, 2025). Finally, Cairn tracks the number of times each article is added to the reading lists of Cairn users. These metrics are then broken down into percentages of institutional users and non-French speakers. Unfortunately, no further information is provided on the presence and number of non-academic professionals among this readership.
ConclusionWe submitted our application to the FNEGE last January. The FNEGE has since launched the work of the commissions, one for scientific journals from the French-speaking community and the other for international journals. The commissions will submit their evaluations by early October at the latest. There will be two months to appeal the evaluations before the ranking is published in December 2025.
Awaiting for new methods for evaluating scientific research results in line with the San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment (American Society for Cell Biology, 2012), the FNEGE ranking still serves our scientific community in a number of ways.
ReferencesAmerican Society for Cell Biology. (2012, December 16). Déclaration de San Francisco sur l’évaluation de la recherche. DORA. https://sfdora.org/read/read-the-declaration-french/
Cairn. (2025, March 16). Métriques | Cairn.info. Cairn.Info. https://apropos.cairn.info/fr/metriques
College scientifique de la FNEGE. (2011). Classement des revues scientifiques en sciences de gestion (p. 32). FNEGE.
Counter Metrics. (2025, March 16). Delivering The Standard For Usage Metrics. Counter Metrics. https://www.countermetrics.org/
Crossref. (2025, March 16). You are Crossref [Website]. Crossref. https://www.crossref.org/
FNEGE. (2024). Procédure classement des revues scientifiques en sciences de gestion et management pour le classement 2025. FNEGE. https://fnege.org/classement-des-revues-scientifiques-en-sciences-de-gestion/
Vitari, C., & Leclercq-Vandelannoitte, A. (2025). L’importance de la production académique francophone: Un levier pour une science plurielle et inclusive. Systemes d’information Management, 30(1).
