Download - Communicating our Research Robin Wensley, Open University Yehuda Baruch, Southampton Business School
Communicating our Research
Robin Wensley, Open University Yehuda Baruch, Southampton Business School
Our focus
Publish or Perish How to avoid perishing (even before
starting academic career)
Our aims
Learning to be effective writer of academic refereed papers
Learning the ‘system’ and process of publishing academic refereed papers
Exploring alternative or parallel ways to disseminate our research
Some key issues Recognising the Diversity of Audiences,
Translations and Timescales The nature of multiple audiences and
sequential gatekeepers The Issue of “Lost in Translation” between
different worlds Translation and the Time Line A Communications Approach: Some
Suggestions
Publish or Perish
What are the odds?
Who are the key players? For papers: Editors and Reviewers For books: Publishers (and reviewers)
When to start (and what to start with)?
Know-how
First part: The publication process
Overall goal: To unveil the “mystery” of journal publication processes of knowledge creation
More specific goals: ‘Demystify’ the process and explain what happens behind
the scenes - the internal operations and decision processes taking place at various journals
Help prospect authors to be more successful by understanding how the system works
Challenges
More scholars and universities; not many more journals, almost no more top journals
The bar is constantly being raised
But Faster, effective and more humane
processes
Targeting a paper
Major options: Academic empirical
Qualitative Quantitative
Academic conceptual / “review” Practitioner
What makes a strong paper? Contribution – to theory and to practice
Is it interesting? What’s new? Does it add to current ‘conversation’? The ‘So what?’ question
Credibility Builds on established theory Does the methodology fit and robust? Are the conclusions valid? Limitations – don’t try to hide
What makes a strong paper? Cont.
Generalizability? Global or context specific?
Did you suggest future research agenda?
Readability • Are you clear? • Did you follow a logical progression?• Is there a repetition? • Are you repeating yourself?...
Read
Huff Sigismund, A. (2009). Designing Research for Publication, London, Sage.
Silvia, P. J. (2007). How to write a lot: A practical guide to productive academic writing. Washington DC, APA.
Get the ‘Know How’
Title Abstract & key-words Intro Body Ending Referencing Figures, tables etc.
Title
Informative Catchy Tuned to web search
Writing abstract Abstract should be concise should reflect only what appears
in the original paper. Start by
The purpose of the paper –the reason(s) or aims of the research? To which theory it contributes?
The design/methodology/approach, to manifest how the objectives are achieved
The findings – the analysis, outcomes, intriguing results Research implications (if applicable), but also possible limitations. End with clear identification of the major added value it brings to the
literature (what is original). Avoid references
Intro
Why is it important? What is known? What is unknown, thus: What is the gap? The contribution – how did you bridge that
gap
End: the aim(s) of this paper… It is structured as follows…
Ending
What is the contribution To theory To practice
What are the limitations (and implied future research)
End on a positive note (‘Conclusions’?)
Referencing +
Always do your homework – match presentation to journal’s style – in particular references
Same for figures, tables, etc. Do the highlighter exercise for a match
between the references list and the references mentioned in the text
The process
Stage one – under Your control Stage two – under the Editor’s control Stage three – back to you
Can be a cyclical process
Stage one – under Your control
Paper written
Read Journal instructions
Target a Journal (consult co-authors)
Check with Editor
Revise, adjust, circulate to co-authors & colleagues
Write a cover letter
Edit & proof-read
Submit Pray
Not just pray
Work on your other projects
I did say projects, not project
Manage your pipeline
Stage two – under Editor’s control
Editorial decision I: Pass to review/Desk reject/Desk return
ReviewMs sent to reviewers
Invitation to Revise & Resubmit
Cry on a friend's shoulder
What next? Reject
Accept!
(Sci-Fi) Editorial Decision II
Celebrate
Read
Day, N. E. (2011). The silent majority: Manuscript rejection and its impact on scholars. Academy of management Learning & Education, 10, 4, 704-718.
Stage three – back to you
Agree or not to R&R
Re-read – doable? Do it
Put the R&R invitation in drawer (time?)
Not doable - Check with Editor
Revise, circulate to co-authors
Write a detailed response letter
Edit & proof-read
Re-Submit Pray
Revise & resubmit to the journal?
Altman, Y. & Baruch, Y. (2008). Strategies for revising and resubmitting papers to refereed journals. British Journal of Management, 19(1), 89-101.
A study based on responses from 249 business and management scholars from the UK and USA
The question – what would authors do when invited to revise & resubmit
A number of options exist
Revise & resubmit to the journal? The seven options:
(1) discard the paper
(2) submit ‘as it is’ to another journal of similar or better standard
(3) submit ‘as it is’ to another journal of lower standard
(4) revise and submit to another journal of similar or better standard
(5) revise and submit to another journal of lower standard
(6) revise and re-submit to the original journal
(7) challenge the editor’s decision.
Why – Reasoning MatrixAgency:Self focused argument
Agency:System focused argument
Instrumental argument
I want to publish – this is the most cost-effective way. I work to optimize my research output – a calculative approach
This is how the system works, and I have to comply. These are the ‘rules of the games’ (the non compliance people try to ‘beat the system’)
Value-based argument
This process comes to make me better, to improve the paper, and thus develop me too
This is ‘fair-play’, this is the most ethical approach
Tips
Review for journals, in particular your target journals (see the following slides)
Attend conferences Collaborate with co-authors who are:
Smarter than you; that will energize you; that have complementary competencies
Manage your research projects as such
Career advice: The relevance of the Intelligent Career (Arthur & Defillippi, 1995)
Know Why Know How Know Whom
+ Know When
ACADEMIC CAREERS: A PARTICULAR FORM OF SELF EMPLOYMENT. WHO WILL WE WANT TO JUDGE PROGRESS AND ON WHAT BASIS?
THE IMPORTANCE OF COMMUNICATIONS AND ENGAGEMENT
DEVELOPING YOUR COMMUNICATIONS STRATEGY: AUDIENCES, TRANSLATION AND TIMELINESS
THE NATURE OF MULTIPLE AUDIENCES
•WITHIN AND BETWEEN VARIOUS GROUPINGS
•SOME KEY GROUPS: COLLEAGUE RESEARCHERS AND PEERS, STUDENTS, EXECUTIVES, JOURNALISTS AND POLICY MAKERS
•THE PROCESS OF SEQUENTIAL GATEKEEPERS TO GET TO THE AUDIENCE
SEQUENTIAL GATEKEEPERS
•GRANT BIDS: OFFICE; REVIEWERS; BOARD
•JOURNAL ARTICLES: DESK ASSESSMENT; REVIEWERS; EDITORS/AREA EDITORS
•MEDIA: JOURNALISTS, SUB-EDITORS, EDITORS.
THE ISSUE OF “LOST IN TRANSLATION”
•EVA HOFFMAN'S BOOK AND SOFIA COPPOLA'S FILM
•The Book: the permanent shift from Poland to Canada -
•The Film: a temporary shift from one culture (USA) to another (Japan)
•BOTH RAISE QUESTIONS OF TRANSLATION BUT ONLY THE FORMER RAISES SERIOUS QUESTIONS OF IDENTITY.
One survey examined why management research is often not applied in management practice. The "lost in translation" problem occurs when academic researchers do not present their results in ways that make sense to practitioners. The "lost before translation" problem occurs when
MANAGEMENT RESEARCH DOES NOT ADDRESS QUESTIONS THAT ARE EVEN OF INTEREST TO
MANAGERS.
LOST BEFORE TRANSLATION?
Shapiro, D.L., Kirkman, B.L., & Courtney, H.G. 2007. Perceived causes and solutions of the translation problem in management research. Academy of Management Journal, 50: 249-266.
TRANSLATION AS DECODING AND ENCODING
Translation may be regarded as a kind of litmus paper that makes the process ( of decontextualization and recontextualization) unusually visible. What I was just describing rather glibly as 'equivalents' for alien concepts and practices cannot be assumed to exist. Some words, ideas and customs are a good deal less translatable than others. Especially the important ones. So much so that the British writer Salman Rushdie once suggested, in his novel Shame, that:
TO UNDERSTAND A CULTURE, ONE SHOULD FOCUS ON ITS UNTRANSLATABLE WORDS.
Peter Burke, Lost (and Found) in Translation: A Cultural History of Translators and Translating in Early Modern Europe, European Review (2007), 15:1:83-94
FROM SOURCE TEXT TO TRANSLATED TEXT
•From word-for-word to sense-for-sense to the relationship between the ST (Source Text) and the TT (Translated Text)
•THE ST NO LONGER HAS PRIVILEGED STATUS
• ST HAS (ACQUIRES) ITS MEANING IN THE CONTEXT OF AN AUDIENCE.
EVA HOFFMAN ON WORDS
Every Day I learn new words, new expressions... The words I learn now don't stand for things in the same unquestioning way they did in my native tongue. “River” in Polish was a vital sound energised with essence of riverhood, of my rivers, of my being immersed in rivers. “River” in English is cold – a word without aura.
Translation and the Time Line of Research
DESIGN: What is of interest may not be researchable and vice-versa
FIELDWORK AND ANALYSIS: Even when it is of interest to different communities the research process takes time and priorities and interests change.
DISSEMINATION: How might we balance the need for timeliness with the careful process of independent review?
INITIATION Enquiry driven by theory ( A journals)
Research agenda adapted to organisational interests
Research questions derived from dialogue
Organisation identifies broad issues and seeks academic collaboration
Organisation defines questions and hires researchers
FIELDWORK Researchers use external data sources
Researcher get permission to survey managers or employees
Interviews held with emergent sample, some jointly
Academics act as advisors in sorting sample and data collection
Sample and questions determined by organisation
DATA ANALYSIS Researchers do it all.
Draft findings checked out with organisation
Initial findings discussed; lead to further data
Organisation interprets and checks out with academics
Organisation takes data and makes up own mind
CONTACTS Contact only with gatekeepers
Contact with subgroup (e.g. SMT)
Wider contact and sharing of basic questions
Work with practitioner community and share questions
Respond as facilitator to community’s questions
OUTPUT Academics write for A journals
Organisation people contribute but academics write
Joint output in practitioner press.
Organisation dissemination in practitioner communities; academics help
Internal dissemination by organisation only
Table 0.1: Mapping Collaborative Research Against Five Dimensions (Easterby-Smith, Mark (2012)
WORK STAGE Theory Driven “In the Middle” Problem Driven
The Worlds of Academe and Practice
Kieser and Leiner (2009) argue that following Luhmann, the worlds of scientific research and economic practice are in the end closed systems which operate according to different logics: true/false in the case of science; payment/non-payment in the case of economic practice
BUT whilst the two worlds do indeed operate according to different basic principles, they can and do interact.
Following Luhmann, Rasche and Behnam (2009) argue that interventions between the worlds of science and practice will initially be seen more as "irritations" or as "fictions". However:
treating research insights “as if they were relevant” can mean they become so but in unexpected ways to both academics and
practitioners.
A COMMUNICATIONS APPROACH: SOME SUGGESTIONS: (1)
•Stories matter and are powerful ( outliers, context, identification)
•Remember the sub-editors rule: you can cut the text at almost any point!
•Use footnotes and endnotes properly
A COMMUNICATIONS APPROACH: SOME SUGGESTIONS: (2)
A Realistic Portfolio of Audiences
The twin challenges: That’s Interesting! and So What?
Mystery as Method
Remember the broad rationale for references: helps the audience locate your work in their wider context.
Further Reading
• Rasche, Andreas and Michael Behnam (2009), “As if were relevant: a systems theoretical perspective on the Relation between Science and Practice”, Journal of Management Inquiry September 2009 vol. 18 no. 3 243-255
• Hoffman, Eva, Lost in Translation, William Heinemann : London, 1989
• Alvesson, Mats and Dan Kärreman Qualitative Research and Theory Development: Mystery as Method, Sage Publications: London, 2011
• Easterby-Smith, Mark (2012) ‘Research Collaboration in Management: Exploring the Academic-Practitioner Divide’ , Working Paper, Department of Management Learning and Leadership, Lancaster University, Lancaster. LA1 4YX
Final note
Exploit experienced scholars Start with us… (i.e. Q&A)