Tag Archives: MeetTheEditor

Department of Management Meets the Editor: Professor Jonathan Doh

Leave a reply

Researchers aspiring to publish in Journal of Management Studies joined Birkbeck’s Department of Management for an hour with General Editor Professor Jonathan Doh.

Birkbeck’s Department of Management was delighted to welcome Professor Jonathan Doh for the seventh event in our Meet the Editor series on Monday 14 February 2022.

The seminar was chaired by Dr Muthu De Silva, Assistant Dean for Research in Birkbeck’s School of Business, Economics and Informatics, who welcomed colleagues from all over the world to the online session.

Professor Doh is General Editor of the Journal of Management Studies and was Editor in Chief of the Journal of World Business from 2014-18. He is Associate Dean of Research and Global Engagement, Rammrath Chair in International Business, Co-Faculty Director of the Center for Global Leadership, and Professor of Management at the Villanova School of Business. With over 130 publications and 18,000 Google Scholar citations to his name, Professor Doh brings a wealth of knowledge and experience to our Meet the Editor series.

Introduction to the Journal of Management Studies

The Journal of Management Studies (JMS) is a consistently highly ranked, multidisciplinary journal with a long-established history of excellence in management research. It has a 5-year Impact Factor of 10.960 and has been on the FT 50 list since 2010.

JMS has three General Editors and nine Associate Editors based across Europe, Asia and North America and has an Editorial Review Board of over 200 academics.

While JMS is a general management journal, there are several factors that set it apart from other journals in the field:

  • JMS considers itself to be especially pluralistic, with a range of different contributions from different places. The journal is open to a wide range of methodological approaches and philosophical underpinnings.
  • JMS Editors have a fixed term of office and cannot publish in JMS, aside from Editorials and Introductions to commissioned content.
  • JMS Editors consult another member of the editorial team in the advanced stages of revision to ensure consistency in the decision-making process.
  • JMS has a dedicated Editorial Office team to assist with any issues or queries regarding paper submissions.

Why become a reviewer?

Professor Doh encouraged members of the audience, particularly early career researchers, to consider volunteering as a reviewer. For many Editors, becoming a reviewer is the first step in their editorial journey. Reviewing improves scholarly skills and is an opportunity to give back to the academic community. Those interested in becoming a reviewer for JMS can apply via Scholar One.

What are the publication criteria for the Journal of Management Studies?

JMS publishes innovative empirical and conceptual articles which advance knowledge of management and organisation. Professor Doh stressed that editors are particularly interested in unusual, surprising or challenging papers with a strong theoretical orientation.

Common reasons for rejection include lack of clear contribution, lack of methodological rigour or a clear and appropriate theoretical framework and lack of clear implications for management theory and practice.

In 2021, submissions to JMS reached an all-time high of 1,260. The majority of submissions come from Europe and Asia, with North America being the next highest contributor.

What is the review process for the Journal of Management Studies?

JMS operates a double-blind peer review process. Papers that go out for review typically receive three reviews drawn from the JMS Editorial Board as well as ad hoc reviewers and they aim to provide a decision within three months. Any paper that is to go out for review is screened for overlap with previous papers using the iThenticate software.

Typically, manuscripts will be revised two to four times before acceptance. Time from acceptance to appearing in print is approximately one year.

The desk rejection rate for JMS currently stands at 66% and the rejection rate after the first round of reviews is 26%. The acceptance rate is around 3%, however Professor Doh encouraged researchers to view this in the context of a vast increase in submissions year on year.

What types of articles does the Journal of Management Studies publish?

While the bulk of JMS publications are regular articles, Professor Doh highlighted the value in review articles. This could be particularly relevant for PhD students, who will have conducted a literature review as part of their thesis. In particular, JMS looks for literature review articles that add value in terms of theory contribution by situating and critiquing the literature, identifying any gaps and suggesting new avenues for research. JMS also considers meta-analyses as review articles.

The journal also publishes short essays, ‘JMS Says’, intended to catalyse new thinking and ‘point-counterpoints’ articles, which put forward a position or argument paired with one or more other articles proposing alternative arguments or perspectives. Essays are considered on an ad hoc basis. Professor Doh reflected on the merits of collaborations between junior and senior scholars and encouraged junior scholars to consider such collaborations when submitting to JMS says.

Instructions on how to submit to the different areas of JMS can be found online.

We would like to thank Professor Doh for an insightful and informative session.

Further Information

Share

Department of Management meets the editor: Dr Robert Wapshott

Leave a reply

The Editor of International Small Business Journal shared insights into achieving publication success in this virtual event.

Birkbeck’s Department of Management was delighted to welcome Dr Robert Wapshott, Editor for International Small Business Journal (CABS 3*), to our latest Meet the Editor session. The event was chaired by Dr Muthu De Silva, Assistant Dean (Research) in Birkbeck’s School of Business, Economics and Informatics.

How to publish papers in International Small Business Journal

Dr Wapshott began the session with advice for researchers aspiring to publish in International Small Business Journal (ISBJ). The journal focuses on publishing high-quality, highly relevant research on small business and entrepreneurship and features a broad range of fields and approaches.

Dr Wapshott shared some key details about ISBJ emphasising that the team works hard to reach decisions quickly and the importance of reviewers’ valued contributions to the journal’s overall strength. Dr Wapshott also highlighted that a small percentage of the manuscripts submitted to the journal are finally published in the journal

When a paper is submitted to ISBJ, it undergoes an editorial review by one of the two editors or the Editor in Chief. This is to check that the submission is relevant in scope and fit for the journal. Papers are then peer-reviewed, hopefully ending in publication.

How can I tell if my paper is a good fit for International Small Business Journal?

Above all, Dr Wapshott advises reading the journal and allowing time for the style to “sink in” to get an idea of whether your work is a good fit. An exercise to support this process would be to select some papers from the journal and study each of them by section.

When submitting papers, it is important to show how the work is relevant to journal’s readership, for instance the kinds of debates that might be of interest. Finding the ‘right’ audience for a paper can help the spread of its author’s ideas because the readers will be engaged in pursuing similar questions and topics.

Dr Wapshott also advised asking for feedback from colleagues that have published in ISBJ before, or who know the field, on whether the paper is a good fit for the journal.

Finally, it is important to consider whether ISBJ publishes the kind of work that you would like to write in terms of length, style and topic and whether there is an engaged readership for the paper’s topic, as this is key to supporting engagement with the paper beyond publication.

Papers accepted for publication in ISBJ have several things in common:

  • Clearly articulated contributions to debates that are relevant to the ISBJ audience
  • A contribution that matters beyond simple novelty
  • Careful engagement with the reviewers’ comments

Advice on writing and submitting a research paper

Dr Wapshott shared some general advice on writing and submitting a research paper.

Firstly, carefully consider keywords and ensure they are not too specific; they should link to other work in the journal and not just the paper submitted. Papers should be written in plain language where possible, showing sophistication instead through the ideas and their development.

What are the reasons for rejecting papers from International Small Business Journal?

Dr Wapshott shared the main reasons why a paper may be desk rejected:

  • Vague aims
  • Dated literature
  • Little sign of claimed contribution
  • Poor fit with the journal

If a paper is rejected at the full review stage, it could be due to:

  • Questionable contribution (e.g. inadequate theory)
  • Argument does not ‘work’, perhaps due to gaps or leaps in reasoning
  • Limitations in the method (e.g. inappropriate data for the claims made in the paper)

Advice for responding to reviewers

Dr Wapshott stressed the importance of treating reviewers with respect, even when disagreeing with their comments, by engaging with any feedback given and taking the time to explain your position. A good check is to imagine the reviewer in the room, or that they are an immediate colleague, and consider how you would respond to them.

A question from the audience asked for advice on dealing with rejection. Dr Wapshott focused on this as an evaluation only of the work submitted rather than anything broader, such as the author’s ability or potential. In this context, Dr Wapshott reassured delegates that rejection is something that happens to all researchers.

He encouraged delegates to try and understand what the editors or reviewers see as the weakness of the paper and to recognise the reviewers’ expertise – if it feels like they have missed the point of a paper, how could this be possible? It can be helpful to return to a paper with a fresh view once the comments have settled to see what might need to be improved.

Dr Wapshott’s presentation was followed by a Q&A session with delegates. One attendee asked what makes an article more impactful? Dr Wapshott responded: “It’s all about the significance of the contribution. How does this change how I see the world, how I think about it or practice? The author’s role is to articulate why the contribution matters. Then people can cite the work because there is a really clear takeaway.”

We would like to thank Dr Wapshott for an insightful and productive session.

Join us for our next Meet the Editor Session

Our next Meet the Editor Session will welcome Professor Jonathan Doh, General Editor of Journal of Management Studies on February 14 2022. Find out more and book your place.

Share

Department of Management Meets the Editor with Professor Geoffrey Wood

Leave a reply

The Editor of Academy of Management Perspectives and Human Resource Management Journal shared advice with researchers looking to publish in highly-ranked journals.

The Department of Management’s popular ‘Meet the Editor’ series has returned for the 2021/22 academic year, welcoming Professor Geoffrey Wood as its first guest.

Professor Wood is Editor in Chief of Academy of Management Perspectives (ABS 4*) and Human Resource Management Journal (ABS 4*, World Elite), Professor and DanCap Private Equity Chair of Innovation and Department Chair and DAN Management at Western University in Canada.

Opening the session, Chair Dr Muthu De Silva, Assistant Dean for Research in Birkbeck’s School of Business, Economics and Informatics said: “We are really grateful to Professor Geoff Wood for offering to speak to us. As you all know, our key aim is to bring all of you together to meet eminent editors which will help us to together thrive in our research journey. Geoff has published over 220 articles in peer-reviewed journals, so we are very much looking forward to hearing his advice today.”

Advice for researchers aspiring to publish in highly ranked journals

Professor Wood began his presentation with some key advice for researchers:

Editors love novelty, provided that it is within the scope of the journal.

For example, the Journal of Finance is more conservative in terms of theory and methods, but open in terms of choice of topic, while the Academy of Management Journal prefers novelty in terms of theorizing.

Highly ranked journals care about how you calibrate your data.

This includes the scale of the study, for example how in-depth a survey goes, the number of interviews conducted and the quality of data sets.

It pays to do your homework: a journal’s purpose may not be obvious from its title.

In a message echoed from previous Meet the Editor events, Professor Wood gave the example of the Journal of Human Resources, which takes economics papers, to illustrate that it is worth doing some research to ensure your study is right for a particular journal.

The chance of publishing in a four-star journal may be higher than you think.

It is often assumed that a highly ranked journal receives thousands of submissions each year, but the Academy of Management Review receives just 400. The chances of publishing a high-quality paper in this journal are therefore higher than you might expect, but at the same time, leading journals expect papers with scholarly depth, inttrenal rigour, and, when appropriate, a sufficient weight of empirical evidence.

First impressions matter

Professor Wood explained “Referees are like anybody – they’re trying to make sense of a complicated world, so they will look for shortcuts and for the initial impression a paper gives.” He advised making a good first impression by ensuring a strong introduction, conclusion and abstract, and ensuring that any formula and tables in the paper are easy to understand.

Common pitfalls and how to avoid them

Out of date references

Professor Wood explained that this mistake is commonly made by PhD students, who begin gathering data well before writing up their findings. The out of date references make it look as though the paper has already been rejected elsewhere, and, potentially ‘zombie’ papers.

Ignoring referee comments

While it is accepted that researchers may wish to submit a rejected paper elsewhere, Professor Wood cautions against ignoring comments from previous reviewers. The comments are likely to give your paper a better chance of success, but even more so, you may come across the same reviewer at another journal who will be unimpressed if you have ignored their advice!

Failing to cite the target journal

Conduct a careful keyword search in your target journal to ensure you are citing the most relevant references. Not only is it insulting not to cite your target journal; the chances are that your reviewer will be somebody who has recently published in that journal too.

Academy of Management Perspectives Journal: Insight from the Editor

AMP’s Associate Editors have a lot of past editorial experience – typically 8-10,000 citations each – which represents “a lot of knowledge and wisdom coming into your paper.” Professor Wood noted the “career-transforming effect” for scholars whose work has been published in AMP.

He reassured attendees that the chances of getting published in AMP are fairly good, as the journal receives comparatively few high-quality submissions. From the end of the year, AMP will scrap the current system of submitting a proposal before the paper to ensure a more streamlined process for researchers.

It is also worth noting that the journal offers special issues, and would normally expect at least one person within a special issue team to be a very senior and well-established scholar.

Human Resource Management Journal

As a journal of political economy, HRMJ tends to take work that provides some reflections in the broader context of research. It also takes a lot of international work. The journal accepts empirical and conceptual papers, however it does not take organisational psychology papers that do not engage with HR issues. Researchers are not expected to be HR specialists, but they do need to engage with HR literature.

Professor Wood’s presentation was followed by a question and answer session, where researchers had an opportunity to ask more specific questions about the publication process, AMP and HRMJ. One researcher commented: “I think this kind of insight is very important – I don’t usually see editors to share these insights!”

Join us for our next Meet the Editor sessions:

Share

Meet the Editor Series Welcomes Professor Ben Martin

Leave a reply

The Editor of Research Policy shared advice on how to pitch to leading journals in this virtual event hosted by our Department of Management.

Professor Ben Martin outdoors, looking into the camera.Having been an Editor of Research Policy (RP) for fifteen years, Professor Ben Martin (SPRU and University of Sussex Business School) is well versed in the pitfalls that hopeful contributors should avoid and, more importantly, the steps they can take to give papers the best chance of being published.

In our fourth Meet the Editor session, Professor Geoff Walters, Executive Dean of Birkbeck’s School of Business, Economics and Informatics welcomed Professor Ben Martin and the international audience comprising more than 45 scholars from around the world. Chaired by Dr Muthu De Silva, Professor Martin shared insight into Research Policy and best practice in paper development with colleagues in our Department of Management.

What is the positioning of Research Policy?

Professor Martin began the presentation by giving an overview of RP, its scope and structure. RP is widely regarded as the leading journal in innovation studies and its focus is on innovation, technology, knowledge, learning and entrepreneurship. The journal is unique in that authors choose which of the twelve editors to pitch their paper to based on their area of expertise.

RP is oriented towards policy and practice and is less theory driven than many other leading journals. It is also interdisciplinary in scope, drawing on economics, management, organisational studies, sociology and political science. Among the most highly cited papers from RP are those which involve conceptual exploratory analysis, as opposed to purely empirical analysis.

In terms of coverage, RP is a global journal, with an even number of contributions from North America and Western Europe and a growing number of papers from Asia.

Advice for academics thinking of submitting to Research Policy

Professor Martin shared insight into how to provide a good submission, stressing that much of the advice could apply to submissions to other journals as well:

  • Read similar papers in the journal to get a flavour of the content, style and theoretical or conceptual approach.
  • Check the website for the scope of the journal and instructions to authors.
  • Seek advice from experienced authors.
  • Present the preliminary version of your paper at conferences and seminars, get feedback and improve the quality before submitting.

Aside from ensuring authors have ‘done their homework’, RP editors ask three key questions when examining papers:

  • Is the topic within the scope of our journal?

An author might demonstrate this by referring to literature that is familiar to RP readers, ensuring the topic has broad appeal for RP readership and arriving at a conclusion of interest to RP readers. This can be further justified in the covering letter if required.

  • Is the paper high quality?

Quality is understood both in terms of topic, which should be embedded in relevant literature and offer an original contribution, and in structure, which must feature systematic analysis, logical argument and a clear, interesting conclusion with specific policy or management implications. Papers should also be written in good English.

  • Who to referee?

Professor Martin highlighted that reliable, conscientious referees have been particularly hard to find during the COVID-19 pandemic. Authors should consider who the editor might ask to referee and may influence the editor’s choice of reviewer through the references they cite.

Revise and Resubmit

Professor Martin offered advice for academics who are invited to revise and resubmit their work to RP:

  • Read referees’ comments very carefully.
  • Decide which points you can respond to.
  • Revise your paper and prepare a detailed accompanying note explaining to each referee how and where you have responded to the points that they made.
  • Be prepared to revise and resubmit more than once.

What to do if your Paper is Rejected

The sheer volume of submissions that RP receives means that inevitably some papers will be rejected. Professor Martin advises authors in this situation to learn from critical comments and to revise and improve their paper for submission in another journal.

We would like to thank Professor Martin for the opportunity to learn from this thought-provoking presentation and for taking the time to answer our audience questions.

Further Information:

Share