Publishing Strategies and Tactics: Some Rules of the Game

1
Publishing Strategies (and Tactics)(Some)
Rules of the Game

• Nicolai Foss
• IVS-CBS NHH

2
Books and Journals

• Books have much more lenient review procedures,
  if any.
• Relatively easy to get a book proposal accepted
  by a publisher (they are almost guaranteed a sale
  above the break-even level).
• Rather few really classical papers have been
  published in books.
• Although European Schools and Universities will
  consider book chapters, US Schools and
  Universities typically wont.
• However, books may be proper vehicles for
  certain kinds of publications, e.g., the
  presentation of the collective endeavours of a
  research group (e.g., Dosi et al. 1988).

-- in general, you should aim at journal
publication.
3
Imagine you have written and
submitted your great paper
Wait, oh yes wait a minute
mister postman Wait, wait
mister postman Mister postman
look and see You got a letter
in your bag for me I been
waiting such a long time
Since I heard from that editor of mine
Etc. -- liberally adapted from The
Beatles
What kind of letter do you want from the editor?
And what kind is it likely that you will get?
4
One possible letter

• I regret the referees are not at all happy with
  this paper ... You are ... a long way away from
  the sort of paper we seek ... please consider my
  advice to turn your energies to other things and
  take up writing a JEL article several years down
  the road when you will have accumulated more
  skills in writing these sorts of papers

Could this have been avoided? Yes -- easily!!!
5
Or.
I think that the present manuscript makes only
a dubious contribution the manuscript is more
of a rambling manifesto of loosely connected
thoughts The condescending attitude is clearly
impeding your ability to organize a coherent
overall argument. I invite you to get down off of
the high horse the core argument of the paper
appears fundamentally and hopelessly flawed
(excerpts from 11 (eleven) pages (single space)
review report from SMJ). Could this have been
avoided? Perhaps.
6
Or
We have read your manuscript with boundless
delight. If we were to publish your paper, it
would be impossible for us to publish any work of
lower standard. And as it is unthinkable that in
the next thousand years we shall see its equal,
we are, to our regret, compelled to return your
divine composition, and to beg you a thousand
times to overlook our short sight and
timidity. -- Rejection from a Chinese economics
journal.
7
Or.
I now have two review reports on the above
manuscript In view of these and my own reading,
I have decided to publish your paper in JITE
provided you prepare a revised version which
takes into account the comments and suggestions
of both referees
Not bad, but it can be even better ...
8
The letter we really wantThe champaign letter
I would like to offer my congratulations on a
paper well done. I am pleased that you have
submitted it to Organization Science. The
reviewers and Senior Editor feel that your ideas
offer new insights, and that they would be a
valuable contribution to the field, and I
concur -- Claudia Bird Schoonhoven, Editor in
Chief.
9
Types of letters

• 1. Outright rejection (by far the most common).
• 2. Non-committing invitation to (strongly)
  revise and resubmit.
• 3. Acceptance, if certain revisions are carried
  out.
• 4. Immediate acceptance (very rare -- except at
  crappy journals -- and perhaps not
  psychologically good to receive).

Adhering to the following rules will increase
your probability of getting no. 2. - 4. letters
and avoiding the no. 1. letters.
10
Rule no. 1 Prepare yourself at the earliest
possible stage

• Think about publishing at an early stage of your
  Ph.d. study
• 1.1. Write in English
• 1.2. Consider writing your dissertation so that
  articles can relatively easily be written on the
  basis of it.

11
Rule no. 2 (Try to) Write every day

• Writing is a skill that needs to be constantly
  nurtured.
• The importance of a regular schedule -- this
  same half hour every day -- is vital a definite
  rhythm is created both mentally and physically
  and the writer automatically goes to his desk at
  that certain time, drawn by habit (Principles of
  Good Writing 1969 88).
• Keeps writers block problems at bay.
• You can be surprisingly productive with only 30
  - 45 minutes -- which everybody should be able to
  find -- of concentrated writing every day.
• Compose first, do the nitty-gritty later.
• Consider working on multiple projects
  simultaneously.

12
Rule No. 3 Present, circulate, and discuss your
stuff!

• Present as much as possible and as often as
  possible
• 3.1. Dont be embarrassed to send your stuff to
  senior people -- they expect it!
• 3.2 However, you cant expect people to read
  multiple drafts

13
Rule No. 3 (contd)

• 3.3. Dont send too polished papers this will
  reduce comments to mere formalities
• 3.4. Dont write too self-serving cover letters
  (e.g. Are 4,5 million Danes right or are the
  authors protagonists wrong.
• 3.5. Send your paper to those senior people whose
  work you cite, criticize, extend, test -- they
  are the ones will take a natural interest in your
  work.

14
Rule No. 4

• Remember to acknowledge those who offered
  substantive comments
• 4.1. Most seniors are busy!!
• 4.2. Dont ever play games
• 4.3. Remember the standard disclaimer

15
Rule no. 5 Revise, revise, revise, revise and
then revise again

• 1. Never be too impatient.
• You may have an idea that is great, but because
  your paper is written crappily it will only be
  published in an inferior journal.
• Always let your paper mature for 1-2 months
  before you look at it again. Then revise and
  revise once more. Then, perhaps it may be
  submitted.
• The typical SMJ paper has probably been
  presented 10 times and revised perhaps as many
  (job-market paper).
• 2. On the other hand, you can also hesitate too
  long -- e.g., when the journal is of low quality
  or you know that others are trying to publish
  similar ideas.

16
Rule No.6 Know what you are aiming at

• Target your paper
• 4.1. There is a journal for your paper somewhere
  in the world
• 4.2. Write with this journal in your mind

17
Rule No. 7 The choice of journal is a strategic
one

• Think long and hard about publishing strategies
• Go ugly early
• Begin in the top
• Construct a submission tree
• Maps your options.
• Helps you to avoid undesirable path-dependence
  effects.

18
An example of a submission tree

• A cross-disciplinary (economics, sociology,
  pscyhology) paper on the theory of the firm

Org. Sc.
AMR
JMS
Kyklos
JEBO
JITE
JMG
19
Rule No. 7 -- Contd

• Consider the journal hierarchy -- e.g., in
  general business administration/management
  studies
• A ASQ, SMJ, AMR, AMJ, OS, MS
• B JMS, Journal of Management
• C SJM, Journal of Management Inquiry, Long
  Range Planning,
• In Organization A Org Science, Journal of
  Organizational Behavior B Organization Studies,
  C Certain small university press journals.
• However, the journal hierarchy is locally
  constructed (e.g., compare Bocconi, Wharton,
  Rotterdam and Copenhagen).
• Inherently difficult to compare specialized and
  general journals.

20
Rule No. 7 -- Contd

• Some Rules of Thumb
• Avoid journals that accept papers without formal
  review (increasingly common) as the plague!
  Quality is almost certainly low.
• Check whether the journal is in the Social
  Science Citation Index.
• New, rising star journals (e.g., ICC, JMG)
  that are not be listed in the SSCI may still be
  attractive -- you basically get in at a low
  price.

21
Rule No. 8 Conformity Generally Pays

• Many journals have almost completely fixed
  formats for papers -- Typically
• 1.Introduction, 2. Litterature Review, 3.
  Theory development and hypothesis, 4. Data and
  measures, 5. Results, 6. Discussion, 7.
  Conclusion
• for a mainly empirically oriented journal, e.g.,
  SMJ, Journal of Management, Journal of
  Organizational Behavior. Journals that allow
  more conceptual papers often adopt the same
  format, but then skips 4 and 5.
• In general it pays to stick to this format.

22
Rule No. 9 Length

• Dont write too many pages
• 9.1. Editors are automically suspicious of long
  ms.
• 9.2. For most journals 30 dbl.spaced pages are
  more than sufficient.

23
Rule No 10 The Language is Standard English --
Not Your Version of It

• This is too often neglected by authors (in fact,
  even sometimes by Americans or Englishmen).
• May not consistute an independent ground for
  rejection -- but surely influences the decision.
• Read, e.g., Principles of Good Writing King, Why
  Not Say It Clearly? Strunk White, The Elements
  of Style

• the paper is written in an extremely sloppy
  manner, with lots of typos, terribly bad English
  phraseology (see, e.g., the very first sentence
  in the paper), and sentences that are
  occasionally outright meaningless. However, in
  principle these are all remediable mistakes, and
  although it is painful to review a paper that is
  so badly written, perhaps this shouldnt
  constitute an independent ground for rejection.

24
Rule No. 11

• Dont write too much to editors --- thus,
• Dear Professor Wisdom,
• Please find enclosed three copies of a paper,
  Post-modernism and operations planning, which I
  ask you to consider for Journal of Management
  Crap. I look forward to your response on this
  paper.
• Sincerely yours,
• Hopeful
• will be sufficient.

25
Rule no.12

• If a journal invites suggestions for reviewers
  and/or editors (as OS does), exploit this
  opportunity
• Editors often have difficulties finding
  reviewers.
• You can influence the review process to your
  advantage.

26
Rule No. 13

• If an editor rejects your paper and gives a
  specific reason, normally your paper is finished
  with that journal
• Sometimes you can fight a rejection (normally
  requires you are a big gun)

27
Rule No. 14

• Resubmitted papers should include all the major
  comments of the editor and the referees -- unless
  you are convinced that they are wrong. (Explain
  this).

28
Rule No. 15

• Referees (and sometimes editors too) can be
  extremely nasty
• Try not to care too much they are the ones
  with a problem.

29
Rule No. 16

• Always quickly resubmit a rejected paper to
  another journal
• Use the submission tree.
• Think about whether it is worthwhile to include
  the referees comments in the new submitted paper
  (it often is).

30
Rule No. 17 Dont give up

• .. Or, at least, dont give up too easily.
• Typically Scandinavian disease to drop a ms
  after one or two rejections.
• However, if your ms has been rejected 4-5 times,
  it probably isnt a great paper.
• BUT Remember that Robert Pirsig (Zen and the
  Art of Motorcycle Maintenance) received 121
  rejections!!!

31
Tenure/promotion-related rules

• Be the sole author of some papers (at least 1/3
  of your output).
• Try to publish a peer-reviewed paper a year in a
  respected journal (emerging European norm).
• Identify a niche within which your research can
  earn you a national and -- potentially -- also an
  international reputation (nat and int nat
  reputations may conflict for certain topics).
• Seek external funding for your research.
• Have publications in the areas that you teach.

32
(No Transcript)