developing a successful research stream stephanie bryant dean, college of business, msu

Developing a Successful Developing a Successful Research StreamResearch Stream

Stephanie BryantStephanie Bryant

Dean, College of Business, MSUDean, College of Business, MSU

AttributionAttribution

Parts of this presentation were Parts of this presentation were generously shared by Jim generously shared by Jim Hunton, Trustee Professor of Hunton, Trustee Professor of Accounting at Bentley UniversityAccounting at Bentley University

““Evolving Standards for Evolving Standards for Academic Publishing: A q-r Academic Publishing: A q-r Theory,” G. Ellison, Theory,” G. Ellison, Journal of Journal of Political Economy Political Economy 2002, v100(5, 2002, v100(5, Oct), 994-1034.Oct), 994-1034.

OutlineOutline

I. Top 5 Biggest Mistakes by New I. Top 5 Biggest Mistakes by New ScholarsScholars

II. Developing a Successful II. Developing a Successful Research Stream that Builds Your Research Stream that Builds Your Reputation as a National Scholar Reputation as a National Scholar (Turning out quality research)(Turning out quality research)

III. Keys to Successful PublishingIII. Keys to Successful Publishing IV. Final Words IV. Final Words

Top 5 Biggest Mistakes by Top 5 Biggest Mistakes by New Scholars (and some old New Scholars (and some old scholars!)scholars!) 5. In a hurry to get 5. In a hurry to get

something….anything… something….anything… published (focus on quantity vs. published (focus on quantity vs. quality)quality)

4. Accepting co-author 4. Accepting co-author invitations randomlyinvitations randomly

3. Working with too narrow a set 3. Working with too narrow a set of co-authorsof co-authors

Top 5 Biggest Mistakes by Top 5 Biggest Mistakes by New Scholars (Cont’d)New Scholars (Cont’d)

2. Sending a paper to a journal 2. Sending a paper to a journal without having been vetted without having been vetted enough enough

1. Not having a cogent stream 1. Not having a cogent stream of research that establishes you of research that establishes you as a nationally-recognized as a nationally-recognized scholar in your area.scholar in your area.

What Do You Want to Be What Do You Want to Be Known For?Known For?

Especially new researchers, but Especially new researchers, but also applicable to intermediate also applicable to intermediate level scholars or those wanting level scholars or those wanting to re-tool in a new areato re-tool in a new area

Dissertation is a common Dissertation is a common starting point, but, this may starting point, but, this may evolve over timeevolve over time

In an Ideal WorldIn an Ideal World

You know what you are most You know what you are most interested in, or you figure it out interested in, or you figure it out over time (interests can change)over time (interests can change)

Try to tie each of your Try to tie each of your publications around a common publications around a common areaarea

Content-oriented, not Content-oriented, not methodology-oriented.methodology-oriented.

The GoalThe Goal

For people to say your name For people to say your name when a given topic comes up at when a given topic comes up at a conference, etc.a conference, etc.

II. Developing a Successful II. Developing a Successful Research Stream that Builds Your Research Stream that Builds Your National ReputationNational Reputation You have to develop a You have to develop a

reputation for high quality reputation for high quality researchresearch

What does “high-quality” mean What does “high-quality” mean exactly?exactly?

A “q-r” TheoryA “q-r” Theory

““Evolving Standards for Evolving Standards for Academic Publishing: A q-r Academic Publishing: A q-r Theory,” G. Ellison, Theory,” G. Ellison, Journal of Journal of Political Economy Political Economy 2002, v100(5, 2002, v100(5, Oct), 994-1034.Oct), 994-1034.

2 types of quality: q and r2 types of quality: q and r

q-Qualityq-Quality

MotivationMotivation ContributionContribution TheoryTheory

r-Qualityr-Quality

Methodological rigorMethodological rigor Data collectionData collection Literature review Literature review Statistical analysesStatistical analyses Robustness of findingsRobustness of findings Generality of resultsGenerality of results Future extensionsFuture extensions

MotivationMotivation ContributionContribution TheoryTheory Methodological RigorMethodological Rigor Data CollectionData Collection Literature ReviewLiterature Review Statistical analysesStatistical analyses Robustness of findingsRobustness of findings Generality of resultsGenerality of results Future ExtensionsFuture Extensions

q-Quality

post hoc

Fatal Flaw

post hocMaybe fixableDepends…?

post hocProbablyFixable

r-Quality

Ideal Effort ExpenditureIdeal Effort Expenditure

EFFORT

0%

100%

Creatingq-Quality

≈ 50%

Developingr-Quality

≈ 25%

Exposing &Revising

≈ 15%

Submitting &Publishing

≈ 10%

Observed Effort ExpenditureObserved Effort Expenditure

EFFORT

0%

100%

Creatingq-Quality

Developingr-Quality

Exposing &Revising

Submitting &Publishing

≈ 50% ≈ 5% ≈ 35%≈ 10%

Ideal versus Observed EffortIdeal versus Observed Effort

EFFORT

0%

100%

Creatingq-QualityGap

Developingr-QualityGap

Exposing &RevisingGap

Submitting &PublishingGap

- 40% + 25% - 10% + 25%

III. Keys to Successful III. Keys to Successful PublishingPublishingBefore Submitting to a Journal

Keys to Successful PublishingKeys to Successful Publishing

CContributionontribution

Before Submitting to a Journal

What have you contributed to the extant

state of knowledge?



RRelevanceelevance


Does the study have theoretical and/or

practical importance?



RRelevanceelevance

EExhaustivenessxhaustiveness


Do you know the literature, and have you suitably interpreted and

incorporated prior findings?



RRelevanceelevance


AAccuracyccuracy


Are you properly analyzing your data and drawing inferences?



RRelevanceelevance


AAccuracyccuracy

TTheoryheory


To what extent is the theoretical development

and/or application correct?


CContributionontributionRRelevanceelevanceEExhaustivenessxhaustivenessAAccuracyccuracy TTheoryheoryEExposurexposure


Have you received sufficient input from researchers on

and off your co-author team?


CContributionontributionRRelevanceelevanceEExhaustivenessxhaustivenessAAccuracyccuracy TTheoryheoryEExposurexposure


Createvalue!


After Submitting to a Journal


RResponsiveesponsive


Reply in detail to each comment made by the editor

and reviewers.



EExplanatoryxplanatory


Thoroughly, yet politely, explain how and why

you responded to each comment; and, how and

why you performed questioned procedures, methods, analyses, etc.




PPersistentersistent


Stand your ground when appropriate, have faith in your

study, and do not let the review process

defeat you!

If rejected, learn from the constructive

input you received and remember--

there is a home for all good work, so never give up!!





LLaudatoryaudatory

After Submitting to a JournalMost editors and reviewers

expend a great deal of valuable time and energy on

their reviews, so take the occasion to compliment

them on their hard work and helpful input where appropriate—not

gratuitously, but earnestly.





LLaudatoryaudatory

YYieldingielding

After Submitting to a JournalIt is acceptable to hold firm on a position when you believe you are right, but, many times you are so close to your work that it is difficult to see a legitimate alternate perspective.

Be flexible and adaptive to review comments—most of the time your paper is significantly enhanced through the review process!





LLaudatoryaudatory

YYieldingielding


REPLYwith care!

Researching, writing and publishing Researching, writing and publishing takes a long, long time.takes a long, long time.

Rough Estimates:Rough Estimates: Creating q-QualityCreating q-Quality 12 Months12 Months Developing r-QualityDeveloping r-Quality 6 Months 6 Months Exposing and RevisingExposing and Revising 6 Months 6 Months Submitting and PolishingSubmitting and Polishing 24 24

MonthsMonths First round: First round: 3-8 months3-8 months Your response: Your response: 3-6 months3-6 months Second round: Second round: 3-8 months3-8 months Your response: Your response: 3-6 months3-6 months Last round: Last round: 2-4 months2-4 months Your response: Your response: 1-3 months1-3 months Publication: Publication: 1-6 months1-6 months

How Long Does the Process How Long Does the Process Take?Take?

You need to have a portfolio of multiple You need to have a portfolio of multiple projects on-going at all times. At a projects on-going at all times. At a minimum:minimum:

Year One: Two projectsYear One: Two projects Year Two: Four ProjectsYear Two: Four Projects Year Three: Six ProjectsYear Three: Six Projects Thereafter: When one project in the Thereafter: When one project in the

portfolio of six drops off (hopefully via portfolio of six drops off (hopefully via publication acceptance), add another publication acceptance), add another and try to maintain at least six projects and try to maintain at least six projects in your portfolio at all times!in your portfolio at all times!

How Many Projects to Have?How Many Projects to Have?

IV. Final words…IV. Final words…

Write every day, or at a Write every day, or at a minimum, on a regularly minimum, on a regularly established scheduleestablished schedule

Set aside a regular time to just Set aside a regular time to just read in your arearead in your area

Go to conferences and MINGLEGo to conferences and MINGLE Identify ahead of time who you Identify ahead of time who you

would like to meet in your areawould like to meet in your area

Final words…Final words…

Teaching will expand to fill all Teaching will expand to fill all your time if you let ityour time if you let it

Work to the top of your ability, Work to the top of your ability, not just what you need to get by not just what you need to get by at your current schoolat your current school

Do some sole-authored papersDo some sole-authored papers Present your work every chance Present your work every chance

you get!you get!

Final words…Final words…

While everyone wants to get While everyone wants to get tenure (who doesn’t?), try to tenure (who doesn’t?), try to remember that this is about you remember that this is about you as a nationally-recognized as a nationally-recognized scholarscholar

developing a successful research stream stephanie bryant dean, college of business, msu

Documents