Return to Question

What are journal rankings that employers look at?

There are few questions on this topic already, but I don't think they fully address my question. Please close this one if it is not appropriate for MathOverflow.

I personally find the horserace aspect of being a mathematician very upsetting and am skeptical of a direct comparison of theorems, papers, journals, mathematicians (movies, musicians, architecture styles, restaurants etc).

Unfortunately on the job market one needs to maximize the weight of their CV by publishing in prestigious journals. So far I was selecting where to submit somewhat randomly based on advises, but perhaps there is a way to do it more deliberately. On a side note: a similar problem arises when refereeing because one is supposed to judge whether the quality of a paper matches the status of the journal. I would say that this is the most mysterious aspect of the math life to me.

Surely different people on hiring committees may have various opinions about these kind of judgements, perhaps majority is flying blind just like me, and possibly what I am looking for is unknowable.

But maybe there is a semi-standard ranking that most people consult with. From my understanding, Australian ranking used to serve this purpose, but it is "defunct" now. Again, I have no interest in whether this list is accurate (because I fundamentally don't believe it can be), I have a purely cynical interest in it.

What are journal rankings that employers look at?

There are few questions on this topic already, but I don't think they fully address my question. Please close this one if it is not appropriate for MathOverflow.

I personally find the horse race aspect of being a mathematician very upsetting and am skeptical of a direct comparison of theorems, papers, journals, mathematicians (movies, musicians, architecture styles, restaurants etc).

Unfortunately on the job market one needs to maximize the weight of one's CV by publishing in prestigious journals. So far, I was selecting where to submit somewhat randomly based on advice, but perhaps there is a way to do it more deliberately. On a side note: a similar problem arises when refereeing because one is supposed to judge whether the quality of a paper matches the status of the journal. I would say that this is the most mysterious aspect of the math life to me.

Surely different people on hiring committees may have various opinions about these kind of judgments, perhaps the majority of people are flying blind just like me, and possibly what I am looking for is unknowable.

But maybe there is a semi-standard ranking that most people consult with. From my understanding, the Australian ranking used to serve this purpose, but it is "defunct" now. Again, I have no interest in whether this list is accurate (because I fundamentally don't believe it can be); I have a purely cynical interest in it.

There are few questions on this topic already, but I don't think they fully address my question. Please close this one if it is not appropriate for MathOverflow.

I personally find the horserace aspect of being a mathematician very upsetting and am skeptical of a direct comparison of theorems, papers, journals, mathematicians (movies, musicians, architecture styles, restaurants etc).

Unfortunately on the job market one needs to maximize the weight of their CV by publishing in prestigious journals. So far I was selecting where to submit somewhat randomly based on advises, but perhaps there is a way to do it more deliberately. On a side note: a similar problem arises when refereeing because one is supposed to judge whether the quality of a paper matches the status of the journal. I would say that this is the most mysterious aspect of the math life to me.

Surely different people on hiring committees may have various opinions about these kind of judgements, perhaps majority is flying blind just like me, and possibly what I am looking for is unknowable.

But maybe there is a semi-standard ranking that most people consult with. From my understanding, Australian ranking used to serve this purpose, but it is "defunct" now. Again, I have no interest in whether this list is accurate (because I fundamentally don't believe it can be), I have a purely cynical interest in it.

What are journal rankings that employers look at?

There are few questions on this topic already, but I don't think they fully address my question. Please close this one if it is not appropriate for MathOverflow.

I personally find the horserace aspect of being a mathematician very upsetting and am skeptical of a direct comparison of theorems, papers, journals, mathematicians (movies, musicians, architecture styles, restaurants etc).

Unfortunately on the job market one needs to maximize the weight of their CV by publishing in prestigious journals. So far I was selecting where to submit somewhat randomly based on advises, but perhaps there is a way to do it more deliberately. On a side note: a similar problem arises when refereeing because one is supposed to judge whether the quality of a paper matches the status of the journal. I would say that this is the most mysterious aspect of the math life to me.

Surely different people on hiring committees may have various opinions about these kind of judgements, perhaps majority is flying blind just like me, and possibly what I am looking for is unknowable.

But maybe there is a semi-standard ranking that most people consult with. From my understanding, Australian ranking used to serve this purpose, but it is "defunct" now. Again, I have no interest in whether this list is accurate (because I fundamentally don't believe it can be), I have a purely cynical interest in it.