KING FAHD UNIVERSITY OF PETROLEUM & MINERALS COLLEGE OF INDUSTRIAL MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT OF MANAGEMENT AND MARKETING

1. KING FAHD UNIVERSITY OF PETROLEUM & MINERALSCOLLEGE OF INDUSTRIAL MANAGEMENTDEPARTMENT OF MANAGEMENT AND MARKETING HOW TO ENHANCE RESEARCH PRODUCTIVITY AND PUBLICATION BY: Salem M. Al-Ghamdi, Associate Professor of Management King Fahd University of Petroleum & Minerals Dhahran, Saudi Arabia Mushtaq Luqmani, Prof. Of Marketing Michigan University Kalamazo, M U.S.A. * The two authors contributed evenly

2. I. Publication Philosophy/ Objective: A. Quantity of Articles. B. Quality of Articles. . C. Path A versus Path B versus Path

3. I. Publication Philosophy/ Objective: Quality of Articles Path A

4. I. Publication Philosophy/ Objective: Quality of Articles Path B Part C starts with few low quality articles in conference proceedings

5. II. Publication Approaches: A. Specialization Approach: 1. Concentrate writings/research in the chosen area. 2. Advantages: a. Economies of scale in knowledge. • b. Core knowledge base is reusable & lends credibility to articles written in the specialized area. • c. Easier acceptance of articles as author gains recognition through increased research/writings in the specialized area. • d. Eventually builds up to being recognized as an expert in the area.

6. II. Publication Approaches: B. Joint Authorship Approach: 1. Work is divided among multiple authors. • 2. Ideal split is 60/40 (60% of effort first author and 40% effort by second • author). 3. Advantages: a. Creativity/work is pooled. b. Raw ideas are refined through discussion. c. Draws on complementary strengths. • d. Often increases pressure/ commitment to complete the paper/project. • e. Increases productivity and acceptance rate (evidence by Eaton et. al • 1999).

7. II. Publication Approaches: C. Pipeline ApproachesL: • Idea is to work on developing several papers simultaneously else you may get stuck on one idea/paper • 20% rule of acceptance --- one paper is accepted out of every five papers submitted for publication • Requires initially building a critical mass of five papers that are ready for submission • Once you develop a critical mass you need to maintain it (if one paper is accepted another one should be ready to

8. III. Content of Articles: • Issue oriented (topical) • Time-oriented (e.g., Millinium) • Area/group-oriented (e.g., on Saudi Arabia) • Conceptual articles: • Synthesizing literature • Developing conceptual framework • Drawing implications

9. III. Content of Articles: • Empirical Articles: • Methodology/Techniques • Sampling size/nature of sample used. • Instrument verification • Implications • State of the Art Literature Articles • Hot topics/buzzword topics • Extreme position/revolutionary thinking piece

10. VI. Enhancing the Acceptance Rate: • Identify/target journals where you want your article published • Check with editor on the suitability of article/topic • Read editor notes • Look for special issues • Make sure your article is properly positioned • Expose the article to the layman Test (can paper be easily understood by a person who has very limited knowledge of the subject).

11. IV. Ideas for publications/ articles: • Trade journals/newspapers • Literature reviews. • Reviewing articles • Conference Proceedings • Interdisciplinary possibilities/ applications • Discussions with advisors/peers • Preface/notes by journal editors

12. V. Gaining Additional Insights: • Be a reviewer • Test your ideas/raw paper: • Conference proceedings • Brown bag session • Seeking advice from your colleagues/seniors • Examine interdisciplinary approaches

13. VII. Avoiding early rejections: • Edit paper professionally • Provide a nice cover letter to editor indicating why you think the paper has value to the readership of the journal • Put a lot of thought in the abstract, introduction of the paper and conclusion sections of the paper • Pay special attention to article format (should be consistent with journal requirements)

14. VIII. Potential areas of Rejection/Criticism of submitted work: • Poor literature review • Article was not unique – a rehash of existing/past work • Unclear purpose of the paper • Lacks a conceptual framework; framework is weak • Limited sample size • Poor nature of sample (unrepresentative sample)

15. VIII. Potential areas of Rejection/Criticism of submitted work: • Poor Data Analysis/Techniques used. • Poorly written paper • Lacks proper format • Lacks implications • Article is not appealing to the readership of the journal

16. IX. Responding to comments on your reviewed article: • Assess the likelihood of success and matching effort required with revisions • Respond to reviewer’s concerns on a line by line/comment by comment basis • Use reviews to reposition/strengthen paper