factor of 4.83, the highest of all business journals • Been involved with MISQ since 1998 as reviewer, Associate Editor and then Senior Editor • Most Developmental Associate Editor award with MISQ in 2007 • Associate Editor for Information Technology for Development, and International Journal of E- Politics • Co-editor of special issues for Information Technology and People, the Journal of Information, Communication and Ethics, and Social Business My experience of journals 3
output – increasingly, conferences don’t ‘count’ • Satisfaction in knowing that your work is read by colleagues around the world • Knowing that your research has an audience – research is only finished when it is published! • Your publication list is pretty much the only institution independent element on your cv • Also a way to find collaborators – people may approach you because of something you have published • REF2020 – 60% outputs (25% impact, 15% environment) Why publish in journals? 4
Collaborate, collaborate, collaborate! • Have a publication plan, with dates • Key is to have papers at different stages • Collaborate with senior colleagues – it’s a win win for them, as they are time starved, but can give valuable feedback and shape the paper for publication • Collaborate with peers and junior colleagues • Collaborate with research students 5 Question #1 – How do I build a publication pipeline ?
target too low rather than too high (but be realistic) • The better the quality journal, the better the feedback. • Pay attention to the ABS list – 2* or above • Submit a cover letter explaining what the paper does and suggesting reviewers • Do you know the editors? • Are you familiar with the type of paper they publish? 6 Question #2 – Where should I target my paper?
• DO make sure your grammar, spelling, English etc is perfect. If necessary employ a proof reader. Sometimes reviewers don’t have the time or patience to look past bad presentation • DON’T reference yourself – it’s seen as vanity, and also not very scholarly if the only source is yourself!
too patient! • Typical structure in a journal is Editor in Chief, Senior Editors, Associate Editors and Reviewers • Single blind or double blind reviewing • All done by a community of scholars on a voluntary basis, don’t hesitate to follow up if you don’t hear from the journal Question #4 – What does the editorial process involve?
• Another piece of advice – be polite to your critics J • Make sure you prepare a detailed memo showing how you have addressed all the key points the reviewers have made • This memo should address all the points made by reviewers, even the irrelevant ones.. • Be polite and constructive, even if you have not addressed the more ridiculous points • Be guided by the Associate Editor as to which points are more important to address • Include a covering letter outlining the main revisions
the door J • Reviewers are subjective. Some may have had a bad day/evening when reviewing your paper. Some are routinely nasty. • If it’s an outright rejection, take what you can from the reviews, and send the paper out again to another journal with some revisions. Question # 6 – How do I deal with negative reviews?
rejection? Calmly consider which category the rejection falls into • Seriously flawed research • Flaws in the presentation (poor language quality, poor organization, problems with analysis or conclusion) • Submission to an inappropriate journal • More subjective reasons (tastes of an individual editor, recently published articles on what was felt to be too similar a subject, over subscribed special issue etc).
of success? • Another piece of advice – be optimistic! • Special issues often have a higher rate of acceptance, and sometimes a lower standard, because they are exploring new areas (but sometimes can be oversubscribed) • Be prompt about submitting revisions – a revision is a gateway to an accept! • Eg only about 20% of MISQ manuscripts are actually reviewed –to get a revise often means you will get published – may take 1-2 years and 3 revisions
in the same way that, when we interview someone for a job, we are likely to appoint someone like us.. • Team up with someone who is not subject to the same prejudice – they may already be part of the network • Contact a researcher who has overcome the same bias as you – they will probably be willing to help • Choose journals who have published papers by researchers subject to the same bias as you Question # 9- How can I even the playing field? 13
you aim to have 2 papers published a year, and you think you have a 1 in 2 chance of getting accepted, then you need 4 papers under review. • As the acceptance rate goes down for higher journals eg for a 20% acceptance rate, and 4 papers a year published, you would need 20.. • In practice people diversify – need a combination of higher and lower ranking journals to keep a healthy output going. Question # 10 How do I achieve a healthy volume of papers to be published? 14
academic activity – the more you do, the easier it gets • Important to understand that it’s a subjective, peer reviewed process, and to work with critiques rather than taking it personally • Open access is a new challenge – open access increases citations, but the quality of some open access journals is in doubt – use the institutional repository to lodge your author copy Thursday, 13 March 14 15