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)