Publishing in the Premier Journals: My Experience as an Author and Editor

1
Publishing in the Premier Journals My
Experience as an Author and Editor

• Anol Bhattacherjee, Ph.D.
• IS/DS Department
• University of South Florida
• Tampa, FL, USA
• Web http//coba.usf.edu/abhatt/
• E-mail abhatt_at_coba.usf.edu
• ZheJiang University
• Hangzhou, China
• March 2008

2
Lecture Outline

• Personal and professional background
• Research interests and current projects.
• Tale of one project
• Performance effects of healthcare IT.
• Publication strategies for premier journals
• What are these journals?
• What evaluation criteria do they use?
• How much time/effort it takes to publish there?
• What are the fatal flaws and how to avoid them?
• How to write paper and handle reviewer comments?
• An action plan for publishing in the premier
  journals.

3
Personal Background

• Education
• Indian Institute of Technology (BS, MS).
• University of Houston (MBA, Ph.D.).
• Work experience
• Systems developer, Citicorp.
• Marine seismologist, Columbia U/LDEO.
• Assistant Prof, UCD (3 years).
• Assistant Prof, ASU (2 years).
• Associate Prof, USF (6 years).
• Full Professor, USF (1 year).
• Director of ISDS Ph.D. program, USF (3 years).

4
What is USF?
ISDS_at_USF is the 16th most research productive IS
department in the world, based on publications
in MISQ and ISR over the last decade
(1996-2005). Source http//www.citm.utdallas.edu/
utdrankings/
5
Job Responsibilities of a US Professor
Research (40-50) Knowledge creation Journal
publications Books/Chapters Conference proceedings
Teaching (40-50) Knowledge dissemination Undergra
duate classes Graduate classes Doctoral seminars
Service (0-20) University activities Journal
roles
Tenure is based on research excellence Publish
or Perish
6
Research Background

• Publications ( means sole-authored)
• MISQ 2001, 2004, 2006.
• ISR 1999.
• JMIS 2000, 2002, 2007, 2007.
• Others DS, IEEE, DSS, Database, IM, CACM,
  CACM, .
• Research impact (per Google Scholar)
• MISQ 2001 sole-authored paper on IT continuance
  201 citations.
• JMIS 2002 sole-authored paper on online trust
  182 citations.
• IEEE-SMC 2001 sole-authored paper on EC
  continuance 101 citations.
• Editorial boards
• MISQ Jan 2004 Dec 2007.
• ICIS 1998, 2004, 2005.
• Grants
• 750,000 in US federal grant for healthcare IT
  research (Co-PI), 2004-06.

7
Research Areas

• Research areas
• IT adoption/diffusion/post-adoptive processes.
• Online social networks.
• Management of IT innovations.
• Research contexts
• Healthcare.
• E-government.
• Small businesses.
• Why these contexts
• Important yet underserved domains of IS research.
• Inefficient sectors that can benefit greatly from
  IT use.
• Impact a broad section of the population.

8
Why IT Adoption/Diffusion

• Sophisticated IT systems are of little value if
  they are not adopted and properly utilized by
  their target users.
• After 40 years of system development and use of
  advanced tools (CASE, 4GL), 75 of large IT
  projects still fail due to inattention to human
  issues.
• IT/human interface is a complex, multi-faceted
  problem that provides unique opportunities for
  building multi-level theories.
• Many unexplored issues
• Human resistance to change.
• IT-based social transformation.
• Politics of IT implementation.
• 13 years experience in this area.
• Largest stream of IS research large audience,
  large impact.

9
Significant Recent/Ongoing Projects

• Health information exchange to support medical
  care of special needs citizens during hurricane
  evacuations at Sarasota County.
• Doctors resistance to computerized physician
  order entry systems at Sarasota Memorial
  Hospital.
• Business value of healthcare IT investments (ISM
  2007).
• E-government adoption at Lviv, Ukraine (MISQ
  2006).
• IT adoption among small businesses in
  Sarasota/Manatee Counties.

10
Research Approach

• Collaborating with research-active faculty.
• Educating and informing
• Reviewing for premier journals.
• Designing research for premier journals.
• Informed risk-taking
• Trying new ideas, theories, constructs, etc.
• Continuous improvement
• Constant reading, questioning, and learning.
• Writing in a simple language.
• Strict schedules and time-management.
• Enjoying research.

11
Tale of One Project

• Performance effects of healthcare IT (HIT).
• How it started
• 750,000 US federal grant for HIT research.
• Suggested by Center board members (hospital
  executives).
• Background
• Healthcare expense in the US was 1.9 trillion
  (16 of GDP) in 2004.
• IT deployment has lagged behind other major
  industries because of hospitals ability to
  assess their business value.
• Motivation
• Previous research used a macro approach,
  examining the overall performance effects of IT
  investments.
• Mixed results Due to aggregating different HIT
  into a homogeneous category?
• We used a micro approach, examining performance
  effects of individual systems, to seek more
  fine-grained results.

12
Data Collection

• Primary survey
• Survey of CIOs of acute-care hospitals in
  Florida.
• Sampling frame and CIO contact information from
  FHA.
• Excluded VA hospitals, psychiatric facilities,
  and pediatric hospitals.
• Initial mailing 2 follow-up mailings (50
  honorarium).
• 29 rural hospitals were personally contacted via
  phone.
• 98 hospitals out of 198 target hospitals
  (response rate 49)
• Variables measured
• HIT adopted at these facilities (independent
  variable).
• Inpatient bed size (control variable).
• Secondary data
• JCAHO data on hospital quality scores (dependent
  variable).
• ACHA data on casemix index of patient severity
  (control variable).

13
Measurement of Variables

• Independent variable
• HIT adoption (Dorenfest 2000)
• Clinical HIT IT to improve patient care.
• Administrative HIT IT to streamline/improve
  internal processes.
• Strategic HIT IT to improve critical deision
  making.
• Each HIT cluster aggregated into a cluster score,
  plus an overall score.
• Control variables
• Casemix index (patient severity)
• Calculated by ACHA (FL), based on mandatory
  hospital reporting.
• 1 average acuity lt1 less acute gt1 more
  acute.
• Quality outcomes may vary with patient severity
  rather than HIT.
• Inpatient bedsize (facility size)
• Size or slack resources known to influence IT
  adoption patterns.

14
Independent Variable HIT Clusters
Source HIMSS Leadership Survey (2002) refined
with inputs from HIT experts and professional
society.
15
Dependent Variable Hospital Quality

• Purpose of HIT is to reduce medical errors,
  improve service delivery, and streamline
  operational performance, i.e., improve quality.
• JCAHO audits hospital quality across the US once
  every 3 years.
• JCAHO certification needed to participate in US
  Medicare/Medicaid programs
• Based on independent audit of 500 predefined
  standards and a site visit.
• Standards include information management
  planning, availability of patient data, data
  collection procedure, use of comparative
  information, etc.
• Data collected is aggregated in 46 grid elements,
  16 performance areas, an overall performance
  score (0-100), and an accreditation decision.
• JCAHO scores for accredited hospitals ranged from
  81 to 100 recoded as
• 1 - Unaccredited (44 hospitals)
• 2 - 81-85 (2)
• 3 - 86-90 (3)
• 4 - 91-95 (26)
• 5 - 96-100 (15)

16
Descriptive Statistics
17
Regression Results
18
Regression Results
19
Findings

• Overall, HIT adoption had a weak performance
  effect (p0.10).
• Performance effects of HIT adoption were
  differential in nature
• Clinical HIT had the strongest effect (plt0.01).
• Administrative HIT had a marginal negative effect
  (p0.10).
• Strategic HIT had no significant effect.
• Individual cluster effect (w/o multicollinearity
  between HIT clusters)
• Effects of clinical and strategic HIT unchanged.
• Administrative HIT had a slightly positive but
  non-significant effect.
• Implication
• IT adoption influence performance only when IT
  transforms business processes (clinical), rather
  than automate (administrative) or informate
  (strategic) them - similar to Banker et al.
  (2006, Mgmt. Sci.).

20
Overall Assessment

• Strengths
• Multi-method study (overcomes common method
  bias).
• High response rate of 49 (overcomes non-response
  bias).
• Insight into which HIT impacts performance and
  which ones do not.
• Demonstrates the utility of micro-level measures
  of IT adoption.
• Weaknesses
• Is raw count of HIT an adequate measure of HIT
  adoption?
• All HIT treated equally without consideration of
  their scope of use, complexity, year of adoption.
• Results generalizable to other types of IT?
• Interesting but theoretical contribution?

Which journal will publish this research? Can
this research be improved?
21
Publishing in the Premier Journals
22
What are the Premier Journals
Method 1 Based on survey of scholars in the
discipline www.isworld.org
23
What Are the Premier Journals
Method 2 Based on Web of Science ISI Impact
Factor Scores (2006)
24
How Hard is it to Publish in Premier Journals

• MIS Quarterly statistics
• Received 534 submissions ( 220 new) in 2005.
• Publishes about 16-20 papers per year.
• Acceptance rate is 10 (6 in 2001).
• Chua et al. (2003, JAIS) study

4 journals MISQ, ISR, JMIS, CACM 11 years
1990-2000 IS Ph.D. population 1934 (www.isfacdir.
org)
25
Why Is It So Hard?
Effort required
Fixed Supply of Premier Journals
Increase in effort
Increasing Demand for Publishing
Year 2010
Year 2005
Year 2000
Quantity (of submitted papers)
Increase in demand for journal pubs
Laws of Economics
26
How Long Does It Take?

• Review cycles for my own paper
• ISR 1999 1 year for 3 rounds (special issue).
• MISQ 2001 1 year 6 months for 6 rounds.
• MISQ 2004 1 year 8 months for 4 rounds.
• MISQ 2006 1 year 6 months for 4 rounds.
• Typical MISQ review cycles
• First round 4 months.
• Second round 3 months.
• Third round 2.5 months.
• Fourth round 2 months.

27
Research Life Cycle
Conceptualize Research Questions
Empirical Research Design
Measurement Data Collection
Data Analysis Interpretation
Lit review, Theory Hypotheses
Writing Paper
12 months
9 months
3 months
First Review
Authors Revision
Second Review
Authors Revision
Third Review
Authors Revision
Fourth Review
Print Cycle
4 mo
3 mo
3 mo
2 mo
2.5 mo
1 mo
2 mo
6-12 mo
Conservative estimate Two years to complete
project two years to publish
28
Research Effort Ideal versus Actual
4
3
Time (years)
2
Ideal
1
Actual
0
Conceptualize Plan Gap - 40
Conduct Design Data Collection Gap 25
Data Analysis First Write-up Gap - 10
Revising Publishing Gap 25
Source G. Ellison, Evolving Standards for
Academic Publishing A q-r Theory,
Working Paper, MIT, September, 2001.
29
Implications for Publishing

• Publishing in premier journals will become more
  difficult as more doctoral students and faculty
  compete for scarce space.
• Many papers published 10 years ago in premier
  journals are not publishable today.
• Incremental improvements of prior work may not be
  publishable today if they dont meet todays
  higher quality standards.
• Todays research must exceed todays quality
  standards and break new grounds in order to be
  published in premier journals in 2-3 years.

30
Myths About Premier Journal Publishing
31
Why Premier Journals Reject So Many Papers

• Fatal flaws (non-correctable reject)
• Contribution (the so what question).
• Theory (new knowledge).
• Measurement (instrumentation).
• Methods (sampling, task, controls).

Art Tacit knowledge Involves design of
research Acquired from experience Science
Explicit knowledge Involves conduct of
research Acquired from doctoral curriculums

• Fixable problems (revise and resubmit)
• Literature review.
• Data analysis.
• Implications for research or practice.
• Writing style.

Improperly designed research is doomed to fail
before the research begins.
32
Fatal Flaw 1 Lack of Contribution

• Theoretical contribution
• What is NEW in your paper that has not been
  studied before?
• How will your paper improve current theories in
  this area?
• How can your paper benefit future research?
• Practical contribution
• How can your paper improve managerial practice?
• Methodological contribution
• Are you proposing a new method/technique that
  others can use in their own research?

Gold standard
Research is not collecting data or proving
hypotheses it is generating NEW and USEFUL
knowledge.
33
Why is Contribution Important

• Why would someone read your paper
• To learn something NEW that they didnt know
  before (e.g., new problems, new ideas, new
  theory, etc.).
• To understand phenomena that is less-understood.
• To discover new/better ways of solving existing
  problems.
• Corollary
• Replicating/reexamining prior studies is not new
  research.
• Solving an artificial or imagined problem is not
  useful research.
• Adding a new construct or hypothesis to an
  existing model may be marginal research, but only
  if it advances our understanding of the problem
  in a meaningful way.

34
How to Create Contribution

• Start with interesting problems
• Unsolved, sticky, and risky yet practical
  problems.
• Complex, multi-faceted problems.
• Problems that appeal to a broad population.
• Gaps, inconsistencies, or paradoxes in the
  existing literature.
• Avoid
• Hypothetical, imagined, or toy problems (they
  dont help managers struggling with more
  important real problems).
• Problems that you think are important, but in
  reality are not.
• Reexamination or revalidation of prior work.

An approximate answer to the right question is
worth a good deal more than an exact answer to
an approximate question - J. W. Tukey.
35
Most IS Research is Not Interesting

• Examples of uninteresting problems
• Do US workers use e-mail differently than
  Japanese workers?
• Does trust increase ones propensity to shop
  online?
• Do incentives motivate knowledge sharing?
• Do frequent data refreshing increase data
  accuracy in a data warehouse?
• Does adding one variable to TAM increase its
  explanatory power?
• Examples of interesting problems
• Why are some firms profitable and others are not
  in the same industry?
• How can managers make fast decisions in
  fast-moving industries?
• How can we reduce organizational politics during
  IS implementation?
• How can we solve global terrorism?

36
Searching for Contribution

• Look for paradoxes (anomalies)
• If e-commerce was supposed to revitalize
  business, why did so many e-commerce firms go out
  of business?
• Now that we have the best software engineering
  practices (e.g., CASE, CMM), why do 70 of large
  systems still fail today?
• After spending millions on knowledge management
  initiatives, why do firms repeat prior mistakes,
  cant diffuse best practices, and dont learn?
• Paradoxes can be framed as research questions
• Examine the relevance, usefulness, and importance
  of RQ
• Which business problem will be solved by
  answering these RQ?
• Are they obvious or tautological?
• If you are trying too hard to fit your pet
  idea it probably aint a good RQ.

What ain't worth studying ain't worth studying
well - Anonymous.
37
Converting Poor RQ to Good RQ
38
Fatal Flaw 2 Lack of Theories

• What is a theory
• A nomological network of constructs and
  relationships that provides a cohesive and
  comprehensive explanation of a specific
  phenomenon.
• Why do we need theories
• Theories provide plausible answers to research
  questions.
• Theories store the knowledge acquired during
  research.
• Theories suggest constructs and relationships for
  study in future research.
• What is NOT theory
• Prior empirical findings.
• Typologies or arbitrary sets of constructs.
• Problems of theories
• A theory may provide only a simplified
  explanation of reality.
• A theory may limit your range of constructs and
  relationships.

39
Selecting Theories

• Theoretical adequacy
• Can your chosen theory provide the best (most
  complete) answer to your research questions, or
  are there better theories?
• If prior research have used one theory heavily
  and some research questions remained unresolved,
  maybe you need a different theory.
• Did you capture most of the important constructs
  and relationships in your theory faithfully and
  accurately?
• One or more theories?
• If each theory offer partial explanations
  multiple theories may help.
• Too many theories No coherent theory
  (theoretical promiscuity).
• How many is too many More than three.
• If using multiple theories, try dissimilar
  theories from different referent disciplines to
  maximize explanatory power.

Theory without practice is sterile practice
without theory is blind - Kurt Lewin.
40
Selecting Constructs

• Constructs must come from your selected theory
  (not chosen ad hoc).
• Goal To explain more (explanatory power) with
  less (parsimony).
• How many Seven plus/minus two.
• Choose dependent variables that are managerially
  relevant
• Good DV firm performance, decision quality.
• Bad DV trust, perceived usefulness,
  organizational effects.
• Choose independent variables that can be
  controlled by managers
• Good IV task complexity, perceived usefulness,
  organization structures.
• Bad IV gender, cognitive style, experience.
• Choose variables that describe the process as
  mediating variables
• Good MV Organizational learning, absorptive
  capacity
• Choose control/moderating variables that cannot
  be manipulated
• Good CV experience, firm size, innovativeness.
• Purpose to rule out alternative explanations.

41
Writing a Paper

• Tell a story
• The story should be interesting and convincing to
  the target audience.
• No mysteries
• What are you researching, why, and how?
• Details, details, details (no vague
  generalities).
• But dont confuse the reader with irrelevant or
  less pertinent details.
• Use a simple language
• One idea per paragraph.
• Maintain a logical flow of argument from first
  paragraph to last.
• Provide illustrative examples for complex
  concepts.
• Describe why someone should read your paper
• Explain how your paper is different from prior
  research.
• Frame your study to appeal to the broadest
  possible audience.
• Do not overstate your contribution.

42
Starting a Paper

• Optic diffraction
• This study examines the wavelength dependence of
  light scattering from small particles.
• Often times, we cannot explain to our children
  why the blue sky is red at dusk.
• Attitude strength
• Some of the most significant events in history,
  such as the French Revolution, the American civil
  rights movement, and the fall of the Soviet Union
  were caused by people with strong attitudes.
• Resistance to change
• Imagine a hunter in the distant past who hunted
  saber-toothed tigers with a long, heavy, sharp
  spear. Now present this imaginary hunter with a
  bow and arrow. The hunter will be well advised
  to get some strong proof that this flimsy strip
  of wood, strung with a bit of twisted hair, and a
  tiny spear with feathers on the end are more
  effective than his large, heavy, sturdy,
  dangerous, and well-tested spear. It does not
  matter what we, the change advocates, know that
  the bow and arrow will work the hunter must also
  know it. After all, its his life on the line,
  not ours. The hunter must also endure the
  learning period necessary to become proficient
  with the bow. During this learning period, his
  ability to hunt will diminish and the threat to
  his life will increase. (de Jager 2001, pp.
  24-25).

43
Handling Reviewer Concerns

• Dont be mad, be glad
• Cry/swear, keep review aside, and reread after
  one week.
• Build a thick skin Reviewers are trying to
  help you understand the flaws in your research.
• Examine reviewers concerns from their
  perspective
• If unsure, ask editors for further clarification.
• Dont assume that reviewers cant understand your
  work
• Premier journals only use reviewers who are
  proven experts.
• Be open to major revisions, but get it approved
  by the editors before starting work on it.
• Prepare a detailed, point-by-point response
  document for reviewers.
• Make a good faith effort to alleviate all of
  their concerns
• Provide additional analysis/data if it helps.
• Dont blindly follow all of the reviewers
  suggestion If you disagree, explain why your
  approach is better.

44
An Action Plan for Publishing

• Step 1 Understand what it takes to publish in
  premier journals
• Review papers for these journals.
• Understand what attributes are desired by these
  journals.
• Learn from mistakes made by others avoid them in
  your own work.
• Step 2 Plan your project carefully
• Take risks Choose new problems, new theories,
  new methods.
• Examine prior literature for gaps or anomalies.
• Look outside the discipline for new ideas on
  theories, constructs, etc.
• Write down the contributions of your work before
  starting the project.
• Discuss your project with others and seek their
  honest opinions.
• Allocate sufficient time to reading the
  literature and planning your project (one year).

45
An Action Plan for Publishing

• Step 3 Complete the project
• Dont take short-cuts for project expediency
  hard work always pays.
• Pretest and/or pilot-test before actual data
  collection.
• Perform all checks and balances, and then some
  more.
• Step 4 Write paper and manage review
• Details, details, details.
• Be candid about your mistakes before reviewers
  point them out.
• Solicit peer feedback from peers before
  submitting to a journal.
• View reviewers criticism from their own
  perspective and make good-faith efforts to
  address (not bypass) them.
• Turn around your revisions quickly.

46
Questions?
The significant problems we face in life cannot
be solved at the level of thinking at which we
created them - Albert Einstein.
Download slides at http//coba.usf.edu/abhatt/