Date/Time
Date(s) - 05/07/2022 All Day
Audience:
Summary:
One of the most challenging issues in publishing research in top management journals is demonstrating that your study makes a “contribution to theory”. It is the most commonly stated reason for rejection by reviewers and editors, and yet it remains a vaguely defined standard based on tacit rather than explicit knowledge. That is, it is a standard that is easier to demonstrate through “hands on” experience than it is to articulate “a priori”. Like US Supreme Court Justice Stewart’s famous statement on obscenity, a contribution to theory is hard to define in advance, but one “knows it when s/he sees it”.
The intent of this workshop is to give junior and mid-career scholars and third year PhD students an opportunity to see how reviewers and editors construct their assessment of a contribution to theory. The process used to accomplish this is to give participants a rare “behind the scenes” view of how reviewers, editors and successful authors engage in the debate about what constitutes a contribution to theory. The key learning objective of this session is to make the somewhat elusive concept of a “contribution to theory” more accessible by working through an actual set of reviews. We hope that, by the end of the session, participants will have a working knowledge of what the concept involves and how it can be articulated both in the manuscript and in the interaction between authors and editors/reviewers.
Date/Time: Tuesday 5th July (10.00-13.00)
Location: Online (Zoom details to follow)
Audience: PGRs, ECRs and all faculty
Advanced Preparation:
Participants will be given a paper to review three weeks in advance of the session (The paper will be a theory paper previously published in Academy of Management Review. Participants should read the paper and draft a review in advance of the session. The review should assess the major flaws in the paper with a view to determining if the paper makes a “contribution to theory”. Prior to the session, the reviews will be collated and the organizers will aggregate reviewer attention to the component categories that, cumulatively, construct a contribution to theory.
Detailed Program:
10:00 – 10:15 Introductions and Review of the Component Elements of a Contribution to Theory
10:15 – 10:30 Interactive Discussion of the degree to which the manuscript has successfully satisfied the component elements of a contribution to theory
10:30 – 11:30 What the Reviewers Said: A review of the actual reviewers’ responses
11:30 – 11:45 Break
11:45 – 12:45 Collective Discussion of what a contribution to theory actually means
12:45 – 13:00 Concluding Discussion
The Art of the Review: Responding to Journal Reviewers in the Revise and Resubmit Process: A Practical Workshop
Date/Time: Tuesday 5th July (14.00-17.00)
Location: Online (Zoom details to follow)
Audience: PGRs, ECRs and all faculty
Congratulations, you have been invited to Revise and Resubmit (R&R) your manuscript! Now what? One of the most challenging issues in publishing research in top management journals is interpreting and responding to the often conflicting directions given to you at the revise and resubmit stage. Interpreting the advice of reviewers can be particularly difficult for early career researchers who may not have had much prior experience with this somewhat inscrutable process. In this workshop we will discuss some of the common challenges faced by authors in responding to reviewers.
The key learning objective of this session is to give junior and mid-career scholars and third year PhD students an opportunity to see how authors structure their response letter, and how they tactfully deal with aggressive, irrelevant and otherwise confusing suggestions. We will collectively work through an actual set of reviews and a successful response letter. We will also share our collective experiences with confusing reviews and discuss when it is appropriate to reach out to a non-directive editor and ask for her or his position on conflicting reviewer demands.
Materials and Preparation: There are no advance readings. Sample reviews will be distributed for the purpose of the workshop activities. If participants are currently dealing with problematic revise and resubmit suggestions, please feel free to bring these to the workshop.
Detailed Program:
14:00 – 14:15 Introductions and Open Discussion
14:15 – 14:30 Overview of Common Issues
14:30 – 15:30 Interactive Discussion of Issues from Actual Reviews (Part 1)
15:30 – 15:45 Break
16:45 – 16:45 Interactive Discussion of Issues from Actual Reviews (Part 2)
16:45 – 17:00 Concluding Discussion
Bio:
Roy is a past editor of the Academy of Management Review and has served, or continues to serve on the editorial boards of the Academy of Management Journal, Administrative Science Quarterly, Organization Studies, Journal of Business Venturing, Journal of Management Studies, and the Scandinavian Management Review. He has won best-paper awards from the Academy of Management Journal, Administrative Science Quarterly, and the Administrative Sciences Association of Canada as well as the Greif Research Impact Award from the Academy of Management.