The formula for getting a manuscript published seems deceptively simple, with an emphasis on deceptively. For family business research, the four-step process starts with authors coming up with interesting research questions, that when addressed, will change scholarly understanding of the motivation, behavior, or performance of family firms. As elaborated in the editorial by
Salvato and Aldrich (2012), while there are many sources of inspiration for generating interesting research questions, in professional fields like family business studies, researchers with closer linkages to practice and/or prior literature are better positioned to identify questions that lead to usable knowledge that is not only published but also well-read and cited (cf.
Lindblom & Cohen, 1979). Objectives such as simply “getting published” may be more dominant in earlier career stages. Over time, however, most scholars hope to make a difference in the mind-sets of other researchers and ultimately practitioners (
Vermeulen, 2007;
Zahra & Sharma, 2004). But, this does not always happen.
The next step is to design and execute a rigorous study aimed to build or test theory that addresses the research questions. A misfit between theory, methods, and empirics is the most commonly observed error in this step. Ideally, the theory selected should be able to deal with the different aspects of the research questions. Similarly, the methods and empirics chosen should be appropriate for investigating these questions. Given the rapid growth and development of the family business literature, there is some advantage to selecting a topic that is narrow enough to allow the study to do justice to the research questions and to fit the expertise of the authors.
Preparing the manuscript is the third step. Pragmatic guidance on this step has been provided in the frequently downloaded
FBR editorial titled: “The Anatomy of a Paper” (
Reuber & Sharma, 2013). More successful authors realize the subtle yet critical distinction between the quality of the research and the quality of the manuscript submitted. In our experience, a poorly written manuscript reporting a good research study is about as likely to be rejected as a well-written manuscript with a poor research design. At this stage, seeking candid and critical feedback from colleagues is useful. Another useful technique is to set the paper aside for a period of time before giving it a final polish. We have found this to be almost as valuable as getting feedback from colleagues as it allows authors to clear their minds, thereby seeing the paper in a fresh light and from a different perspective. This is where we find writing with coauthors to be a great advantage because when one author has already gone blurry-eyed reading the manuscript, a coauthor can take over with eyes that are refreshed from not having read it for a while. Authors of the
Academy of Management Journal’s best papers have reported engaging in at least 10 revisions before they felt their paper was ready for submission (cf.
Grant & Pollock, 2011). Even this short editorial went through a similar number of revisions, which included making adjustments based on the advice of friendly reviewers who helped us rectify problems with the way we explained our points as well as identify additional perspectives on the topic.
4
The last step for authors is to submit the paper to the
right journal, which means the journal whose editorial policy and focus
at the particular point in time best fits the research question addressed (
Craig, 2010). Most successful scholars tend to remain vigilant of any changes in the editorial policies of their target journals. For example, when a journal switches from accepting family business papers on
any topic to accepting
only family business papers that focus on entrepreneurship, one clearly should not submit a family business paper that does not address entrepreneurship to that journal. One way scholars new to a field of study can stay in touch with such changes and developments is through active participation in conferences.
While easy to articulate, these steps are difficult to accomplish; however, most scholars are familiar with the process. Another obvious, but somewhat neglected point, is that getting published also depends on the authors’ ability to convince reviewers and editors that the study adds value to the literature. To achieve this objective, authors must understand the mind-sets of editors and reviewers.
نکاتی که ادیتور ژورنالها به دنبال آن هستند
پاسخ با نقل قول
علاقه مندی ها (Bookmarks)