Getting Published in Academic Journals: What You Need to Know

Transcription

1 Getting Published in Academic Journals: What You Need to Know Professor Pervez N Ghauri Professor of International Business, University of Birmingham, UK Editor in Chief: International Business Review Consulting Editor: Journal of International Business Studies Editor (Europe): Journal of World Business p.ghauri@bham.ac.uk Web:

2 The Aims and Scope of IBR To provide a forum to share developments and advances in the knowledge and practice of International Business No regional or methodological bias

3 Articles Published by IBR in the last 5 years by Subject Area Strategy Marketing Innovation, Knowledge and Technology 11% Strategy 10% Marketing 6% Accounting & Finance International Business Management 15% Accounting & Finance 7% Instituions/ Environment HRM IB Theory, Methods & Scholarship 5% International Business 27% Entrepreneurship Entrepreneurship 5% HRM 5% Instituions/ Environment 9%

4 Journal Impact Factor JIBS JWB APJM IBR MIR Source: Thomson Reuters, InCites Journal Citation Report

5 5 Year Impact Factor IBR 5 Year Impact Factor ,827 2,33 1,871 2,433 2,307 3, Years

6

7 Number of Weeks Time Period for First Decision Year

8 % articles rejected Rejection Rate ,7 79,6 82,6 83,8 84,4 Standard Rejection , , ,9 Desk Rejected Total Rejected ,1 54,6 67,9 69,8 63, YTD Year

9 Getting published in academic journals: Top 10 reasons for rejection 1. Positioning topic and the journal*

10 Positioning Does it fit with the literature stream? Topic / theme suitable for the journal Is it international in topic and content write / rewrite the paper for the specific journal! Establish the need for this paper in the field? Does it has a modest rather than ambitious promise? (The narrower the better)

11 Top 10 reasons for rejection 1. No proper Positioning topic and the journal* 2. No / marginal contribution*

12 What makes a contribution? What is new? Advancing knowledge Providing new connections among already known concepts Are you making a methodological contribution? Exploring new realities / context

13 Top 10 reasons for rejection 1. Positioning* 2. No / marginal contribution* 3. Pre-mature submission*

14 Is the paper ready for submission? Has somebody (e.g. a colleague) read it Has it been presented in a seminar/conference Have you taken care of the comments you received If it was rejected by another journal, have you taken care of the reviewers comments? Language check Is it a coherent paper internally consistent

15 Top 10 reasons for rejection 1. Positioning* 2. No / marginal contribution* 3. Pre-mature submission* 4. No clear research question / purpose*

16 Clear problem / purpose A clear and concrete research question Preferably one main question A clear non-ambiguous purpose with the research Logically and convincingly presented Excite the reader?

17 Top 10 reasons for rejection 1. Positioning* 2. No / marginal contribution* 3. Pre-mature submission* 4. No clear research question / aim* 5. Lacks theory*

18 What is theory? Descriptive literature review is not theory! An abstraction, A net to catch what we call the world : to rationalize, explain and master it (Popper, 1959:59) The hook! A system of idea to explain something A statement of concepts and their interrelationships to show how a phenomenon occurs Not too many theories.

19 Top 10 reasons for rejection 1. Positioning* 2. No / marginal contribution* 3. Pre-mature submission 4. No clear research question / aim* 5. Lacks theory* 6. Inappropriate method poorly argued*

20 Inappropriate methods No explicit data source and its reliability No explicit sampling and data collection procedures Missing explanation and arguments for data analysis techniques Design which does not allow for external validation of dependent variable from multiple independent sources (Common Method Bias)

21 Top 10 reasons for rejection 1. Positioning* 2. No / marginal contribution* 3. Pre-mature submission 4. No clear research question / aim* 5. Lacks theory* 6. Inappropriate method poorly argued* 7. Weak measurements*

22 Measurement / operationalization very important Where are the measurement scales coming from? Earlier studies might have measured the concept in different context or meaning! If it is a multi-country study, have you discussed equivalence and comparability issues? Some concepts are difficult to measure For example: Capability Intangible assets /resources Performance

23 Top 10 reasons for rejection 1. Positioning* 2. No / marginal contribution* 3. Pre-mature submission* 4. No clear research question / aim* 5. Lacks theory* 6. Inappropriate method* 7. Weak measurement* 8. Analysis not rigorous*

24 Analysis Not rigorous Missing discussion / explanations / arguments for moderators and mediators Missing easy-to-decipher tables Little or no explanation of findings / complex tables / graphs Missing discussion on hypotheses testing supported / not supported Missing insightful and plausible explanations

25 Top 10 reasons for rejection 1. Positioning 2. No / marginal contribution* 3. Pre-mature submission 4. No clear research question / aim* 5. Lacks theory* 6. Inappropriate method 7. Weak measurement* 8. Analysis not rigorous* 9. Obvious / speculative results*

26 Results Have you answered your research question? Are the results / conclusions emerging out of your study/analysis? Revisit the promised contribution is the paper making that contribution? Offer insightful prescriptions for managers?

27 Top 10 reasons for rejection 1. Positioning* 2. No / marginal contribution* 3. Pre-mature submission 4. No clear research question / aim* 5. Lacks theory* 6. Inappropriate method* 7. Weak measurement* 8. Analysis not rigorous* 9. Obvious / speculative results* 10. Writing style and flow*

28 Writing Style Don t be a mystery writer be explicit and deliver on your promise Study recent issues of the target journal to comprehend suitable length, formatting, argumentation style etc. Be meticulous with respect to organization, style, grammar and readability a proper language check.

29 Thank You