Going to go on to our next session. So as I mentioned, we're shifting gears a little bit. Let me share my screen. I think all of our panelists are here. I hope. And our next session we're shifting our gears back from teaching to research. And it's a panel of scholars which will hopefully be a lively discussion on the research process. And that's something that transfers across all of our fields. It doesn't matter what field you're in. We all do research. We all have our own process. And I asked a group of scholars from across the different departments to share with us, as we say in hospitality, their secret sauce. Or as Bruce likes to say, share our secrets. And we, we will have a panel presentation where I'll ask them questions. Then we'll open up to questions for people that are attending here today. It is my pleasure to introduce our panelists. And I'm going to just introduce you. And if you could share after I I state, you could share just what your research area is or what you'd like to study. So first I'd like to introduce Olga Gorbachev. She's associate professor of economics. And I think you have to. Hello everyone. I'm sorry for my light. There's a lot of light coming into the room I can't see. So so I do research on household consumption, household consumer behavior. Currently I'm working actually on the impact of bank branches on lending. Whether this lending as two households or whether this is, this is lending to small businesses. And we are in the process of working on a project that looks into the paycheck protection program. And how that how the banking relationships impacted who, who, which of the businesses receive the PPP in which didn't? That's that's my current research agenda. Gray. Thank You. Olga. Next is Mahavira Sunstein, Associate Professor of Marketing in Area Head of Marketing. Hey everyone. So yeah, so I do research in marketing and specifically, I have several streams. The one Luca, crowdfunding, leukocytes, externalities, and the whole thing, or marketing or finance really interests me. Great. Thank you. And Michael John associate professor ever counted? Michael? Hi everyone. I'm mostly interested in, I guess the stock market. And so a lot of my research has focused on the players that are in the stock market to including institutional investors, financial analysts and CEOs and CFOs of corporations. And between these three parties, I'm curious and interested about the way they communicate with each other, the way they interact with each other, either in person or through written or, or telephone or a private meeting communications. So that's basically where. I'm interested in. Thanks. Thank you. My and Fe she Professor of Finance. And I know I'm going to say this wrong. The INa cone Faculty Fellow, hope again, rate ***. Cheryl, You're not alone. That I find to say, I know I should know better because this is what the owner, but but I feel that I don't know the plaque to pronounciation of plan a paralysis. I had a guy Bangladesh. So I guess I'm calling you up. You set it up for me. So I do want to research in getting pretty wide array of areas finance. So I started out after I graduated from Case program, started out doing corporate governance, mortar acquisitions and better capital. Then, you know, my research portfolio expanded into financial analyst, mutual fund, institutional investor and so forth. Tossed and, and, uh, my current products or the problem currently exploring are actually related to a company's environmental, social, and yet basically ESD, a policy and performances. Thank you. Joanne you, associate professor and hospitality business management and associate department chair. Hi. Hi everyone. I'm Joanne and my research expertise and interests is especially that events are set-top hospitality industry. So meetings and events and festivals and even now is already yeah. So I'm specifically looking at the attendees to behavior aspects and what is affecting their decision to attend a band, especially now because I'll call B, then everything old is EBIT become br Charles. So now that becomes my a very brand new interests and how these apart shorting friends. And to influence interest tree and how other people's perception about how much degree of a social presence in this event to Sandy purchase setting is really impacted their decision to attend and come back to face to face meeting later. So those are the things I'm currently to any. Great. Thank you. And we have a wide variety of content that's covered by this panel. But one thing that ties the panel together is that you are all successful scholars, well-known in your field. You've all successfully navigated the tenure promotion process than we'd ask you to share a little bit of your experience and how we can learn from what you've done successfully. So, so I'd like to start with what we all do with questions around writing research papers. And so Olga, I'd like to start with you. When do you know your paper is ready for submission? And if so, what do you do first? Do you set it to a journal? Should you solicit advice? Have somebody else read it? What are your suggestions about getting a paper ready to submit for publication? A review. I think it's one of the hardest things to decide when it's ready because it's never ready. And we are as academics perfectionist. So I think we can always run an extra regression and always check whether the data is correctly cleaned and marched and whether you can ask another question that you haven't asked. But at some point you have to decide that it's over because otherwise you'll just sit on it for a very, very long time. And as a person who just came out of a PhD, I think that's the hardest decision to make because because especially if you're thinking about submitting your dissertation for tail publisher, because it's your baby and you've been working on it for at least three, maybe four years of your life. So I think that the advice that I got at a mentoring between workshop for economics was, you know, talk to people, talk to people early. Have your paper read by your friends, by your colleagues. And you know, at some point after you've presented it a few times, you submit and before you submit. The advice that I wish I I received earlier in my career, advice was send it to people who write on the same topic, send it to the experts who will most likely be your referees or editors. And when I received that, that that suggestion, I was taken aback because how could I send my paper to an expert economist who is recognized in the field? Who am I to, to email this person? And the answer was, well, what's the worst that can happen? The worst that can happen is that this email of yours will just sit them on opens or go to trash directly. Or this expert will actually read it. And you might get lucky and you might get a very good, so you might get, you might get an email back saying this is an interesting topic or event of this person does not necessarily e-mail you back. They might recognize your name and they might remember and associate your name with this particular research. And so my main advice is to not be afraid having your paper read by others. And because the worst case scenario is that they will not read it, but the best case scenario is that many people will, will see your work and they will recognize that you are working in the same area you are, you are, your name is associated with, with this particular research agenda. And they might, they might even write back to you and say, hey, here are my comments here and my thoughts. Thank you. Anybody else have thoughts on when when you let that paper go? When do you send it in? How do you know it's ripe and ready? Miho, any thoughts? So we, and I think accounting and finance to that too. We post on SSRN. And we also present quite extensively before we send the paper. And we also ask the whole world and her brother to read the paper. So we go out as far and wide as we can in order to get comments. But I realized that this is domain-specific. So I have a paper now with an ophthalmologist and top secrecy in their field. Like we sent it to one friend. And we had to sort of make sure that that friend will never, ever, ever talk about it. Default subnet. So I mean, it depends on the area. I think my convey would agree that Sandwich, like posted on SSRN is amazing. Like you get immediate feedback and see how many people downloaded it and, and it gets like a lot of reach even before you published. And the other advantage is that advantages or disadvantages that the reviewers ultimately know who you are. And I don't like, for me, it's like it's find over like I am not into secrecy here. By the time we submit a paper, Everyone who can peer reviewer probably have seen it. But by the time you submit it, because like I said, we extensively presented. So when when do I actually didn't answer your credit? So when do we submit through with the mate when the comments that were receiving or repetitive, like we've heard them before, stem or we know that we cannot fix them or we can fix them in your writing. And like Olga said, I mean, it's never ready, like you could always do more. But within the 50 pages that were allowed. I mean, there's only so much we can do other comments from the panel. So I can just add a few points in addition to what's already been said. That if you don't already know on your own, the likelihood of getting a first-time rejection or first-round RNR, then you really have to ask somebody else, either ask someone in your department or someone that was your mentor advisor in the PhD program. And when they look over your paper, they can give you a sense of, you know, that there's no way this is going to get by the first round or this is pretty interesting. And you'll probably get some comments and RNR. And once you get the RNR, then you can put in all the effort you need to to address the comments. But I guess it is basically through, I think, experience. And if you don't have the experience on your own to know those likelihoods, then you really have to ask for someone's opinion. Well, I like to walk uphill on what Michael said to to know yourself, whether the paper is read or not. Precondition is that you're going to have to invest a lot of time carefully reading the papers published in the journals that you are targeting. Because only through extensive and deep reading can you get a sense of the level of quality that your paper needs to achieve to have a shot. So, so that's a precondition. And then on top of that, I think it's a good idea if you truly can make called himself. Whether your papers ready, it's a great idea to us and papers to your trusted friends, work what advisors, and ask their opinion. And my rule of thumb is that if a comment has been raised by at least two of the people that you asked to read your paper, then you must address this comment before you submit. Because chances are, this is from my boss, a good experience and bad experience you're going to get is common if you don't dress it to a journal review process. And that could be the difference maker between r and r and a, and a rejection. So definitely take the comments you receive from your close friends and trusted advisors. Syriza. And it sounds like I'm the only person that I don't I've just while working a couple of mines on the paper, I don't want to read, I don't want to think about anymore. So I like to send it to journal. I don't want to weigh because I have to wait. I have to endure the waiting game to receive that first round the review and he wouldn't that rejection letter. I don't want to have another waiting came from my advisor and or so whoever they asked them to be because they're not going to be my your side. Oh no. Babies have Zongyuan. I'm once it's ready, if I fill these ready, I'm sending to journal right away. I don't at that round don't pass tests. So you just know and you send it. Yes. You need to test drive. Now. I'm Ray. Great. Thank you. Well, the next question I think I will start with, Michael. Could you share some thoughts on successfully navigating the peer review process? And I just saw a cartoon about like a New Yorker cartoon. And they talked about the peer review process and had all these people standing there with sticks and bats. And it was like they were going to get beat up getting through the process. But could you give us some tips on successfully navigating that peer review process? So I think it's a little political. The peer review process sort of the first step for me and my coauthors taken when we get back a review as we try to guess who that person is. And a lot of times you can start to get kind of closer than you think, you know, is this person or you can narrow it down to a couple of people. Well, once you have an idea of who the one or two reviewers are, then assuming that they are good reviewers and then you didn't get a bad review. Then you sort of imagine responding to these reviewers like, like who they are and who you know them. And even the way we write our responses is sort of in a conversational way and sort of addressing the person as if we knew that person. And if there's something we can address, We say we did it. And if there's something that we don't think we can actually address, we give the reasons why we don't think we can do this or maybe why there was a misunderstanding. So we really take the process as having a conversation with these reviewers and not in sort of an antagonistic or mean way, but to, to just told I have a respectful dialogue and debate or conversation with, with the editors and reviewers. And whenever I'm a reviewer, I appreciate that type of a back and forth. So I would say that as long as you can navigate that well then I don't think reviewers normally reject to you to be mean or reject the EU to be because they don't like your paper. If they do like your paper, you would have got the first round RNR. So I like to write the response memos sort of myself, with my team members to sort of have this dialogue with, with someone who's an expert in your field. And you use their suggestions and comments constructively. But that's sort of mice over overall strategy in responding to reviewers. Right? So the tone of how you respond is as important as what you respond, right? Oda, any thoughts? I think it's really hard if you're just starting out you know who the reviewers are. So I agree that once you're an experienced researcher and you're published a few papers, that's kind of you would know. But as a, as a starting outdoor, especially if you're changing within fields. So when I started the research I was on I was between two fields, macroeconomics and microeconomics and that was kind of hard. And now I'm kind of moving finance, household finance. So I'm always kind of switching around fields because of many reasons, but mainly because my interests are changing all the time. And at that point you don't really have the ability necessarily to know who the reviewers might be. You obviously know who the editors are. And I think it's also maybe field specific. So I don't think in economics you can answer to your reviewers in, in, in this type of fashion site. I guess it depends on the field. I think the review process is probably one of the harshest things that we, as academics go through. There's so many rejections and it's so painful. And as young starting out, researcher, building up thick skin is really, really important because if you don't, you will not survive. Because every rejection is, or, or every rejection or every even. No referee report that you realize this person didn't really read my paper and they didn't put the effort into actually understanding what I'm trying to do. I mean, those things are painful and so you kind of have to you my main advice is when you go through the referee process, keep it at the hands. Distance. Read it first, see what they tell you. Put it away. Calm down. Think hard about what, what's written in those in those papers and reviews and then come back a few days later after you've digested the comments because not all, I mean, if it is really unlikely that the comments are always going to be positive, many times they are not. And that, that could really hurt you as a researcher. So you have to be, you have to build up thick skin and you have to be able to ignore the negatives and absorb the positives. And as I think phase said, at some point, you know, if you see that, if you've submitted your paper a few times and you've received a few rejections. And you see that these comments are similar or are they sort of all hint that the same type of situation that's telling you that that's the thing that really needs to be fixed before you submit any other time. Because a lot of times we, at least in economics, you review processes so long. You could be waiting for 89 months before even the first review comes back. So, you know, you can't you might have a jerk reaction and you say, OK, I'm just going to send it out. As soon as I as soon as the rejection comes back, I'm just going to send it out again. You can't do that. You have to because it's nine months of another waiting. So you can't you kinda have to be careful reading through the comments before you resubmit. So I don't know, it could be just field specific. I know in finance you guys have a much faster turnaround time. Economics is a turtle slowing, slow Turtle. Unchanging profession. It seems so. Good luck. They kind of had to they had both Michael and August it because I share a shared all of their sentiments about the process. And I I kind of did this may be just personal preference, but but I I I agree with the Michael that if you ever get RNR, My my my preference is that, you know, drafted the response to the referee in a, in a personal tower in a, in a conversational way, instead of being extremely rigid, were forward because you want to somehow bring the, the distance between you and the referee. Even though in most cases, for instance, in my in my career I was able to get for the RF radio was, but still I would like to keep the keep the response in a more conversational dialog type of format. And then I call it Hogan. You've got to have thick skin because the rejection rate for top top-down thing across the field is over 90%. So chances are if you suddenly paper out, you'd get killed. And depending on the rough read, some reference can be extremely critical. Eye there was one time that I got. Rejection from a top journal in my field, I counted about 3435 comments, all negative about what I did wrong my paper. So I'm sure if I try really hard, I can do the same to even the the top signing the papers in my field. So this this happens. So you're going to have to have, have faith in your, in your work, have confidence in your ability. Now to say that you should ignore the negative comments or negative reviewers said you do need to take them seriously, but you gotta have faith in your capability, your choice of research topics. And then you want to add something to how to address referee responses. Again, this may be my personal preference. I would like to go I tend to go overboard trusting what they want us to do. So I I'm I'm never left any referee comment unaddressed. Surely, I do. I do more than what they asked. So minor with if you typically probably do a 120% of what they ask. And even, even that, some rare occasions, It's not enough to want to convert. So just do do as much as it can and keep it to keep a quarter keep keep keep the distance between you and roughly short. Yeah, I agree. We divide the base that is, go overboard is always better to do more than you will asked to do. And our cell is kind of strategy that I maybe because this might be a hospitality, I always wanted to be more hospitable and then also make it more reader friendly when I create the research summary is that of staying that please refer to page ten. But I Florida had grabbed my highlights, making sure that they don't have to go and to search for that in our that paragraph, didn't i? I bys so make it reader-friendly and make us feel good even though I don't own a 100% agree with what they asked me to change. So being hospitable and being kind, having Edison also recall, I don't have much to add. Maybe I'll say that in a way, a sort of know like we sort of know if we can make it or not based on the review. And I always try. And usually when to know like I, like, I'm not like super surprised. So in, in marketing, economics, accounting, all of those fields, it's all about causality. Establish causality, show us cuz I'd make sure that causality is like right there. Sometimes, you know that you have written, sometimes you know that you don't have it. There's there's no there's no well, you know, in like Olga was saying like nine minus yeah. I if I know I I don't have it. Siphons. I wouldn't like. Now the process is not that long. I did want to make a comment that it's sort of unrelated, which is when you review a paper. Be nice. I can say very harsh things in a super nice where I was smiling. You know, there's no need to be rude. And we all had our fair share of rudeness though. I sort of like, yeah, I try not to be like I tried to, to be to the point, but extremely, extremely nice. And, and, and this is what by the way, get to reveal quite a lot of top tier journal articles when, when you do a thoroughly seeing movie search and it's definitely helpful for your own research. I always have at least one or two papers that I need to warn us. Once you once you send something back, you get another one and another one. And the other thing is like do not despair. So currently in marketing, the review process is about three years per paper. And that's because the first round usually takes a year. So they give you a year and I literally an olive, my papers, we ask for an extension. So do not despair and takes them. And the only way to beat this game is a numbers game. Great, thank you. I apologize, my dogs barking in the background. The joys of working at home. Which brings us to our next question that relates to writing papers and doing research. And this came up earlier. Today. We actually had a good conversation about it. How do you block out time to write? How do you, how are you all so productive? What is your writing habits or ways that you invest your time and energy into your research. And particularly now with coded were all home we have families or dogs or other or the laundry or other things tidy out is that we don't have at work. Could you could you share with us how you block out time to write tips and suggestions for being productive. And I'll open up to anybody who'd like to answer. Fate. Well, I guess two things that work for me. One is deadlines. And again, I know this may be very specific because I know people, some people don't like deadlines, but for me, deadlines are what make me go. Can, can, can enhance my efficiency. And of course, by deadlines, I'm talking about both externally imposed deadlines, like the deadlines for a lot of the conferences in your respective fields. If you want to get your paper on this program into what it is to get a draft already by the deadline. So that would be pretty good motivator. But, you know, KM is where there is no externally imposed deadline. What do you do? What I tend to deal with them to myself is that I would set up internal Brown Bag Seminar in my department or at a school that's nearby that I can get you. So once I said that, I know I need to have a paper ready by that data lives. So that, again, How are we going to get a paper? I read? I think another, another another motivator that too, that helps me. I think it's especially probably relevant in this call it 19 period is keep the we're a long-term perspective in mind. Play the long game. So whatever distraction and, and the difficulties that you are dealing we're facing or keep the main thing. Main thing, we focus on the long-term objective of your careers. So that will always keep reminding, reminding yourself of that, that I should give you plenty of motivation to keep writing, keep working. Can I add to favorites? I also do deadlines, but it doesn't have to be like that. Too. Through seminar. I like literally coming to my to my coauthors. I will give you this on this date. And even though my coauthors or my friends, I try to write with people who are close to me and I enjoy working with, and I can always write back to them and say, listen, I couldn't do it. If I start, this is a slippery slope. So my sort of like personal resolution, that will never happen. If I commit, I make it happen. And yes, it comes on the expense of the thing. Sometimes. When I was when my kid was much younger, they had to draw a picture of her mother and was like, I think maybe a year or two year before done here. And everyone was like tomatoes are rating their mothers doing yoga. My kids like my mom likes to work and there is my mom and the computer. So I mean, yes. But when the review process is so long and you have the axle of the tenure process. There's no other way to state and give a short answer. For me and many of my coauthors before we got tenure that the best time to write was between 11:00 AM PM three, And that's when everyone was asleep, including all the children. That's when all the regressions were being run, all the emails flying back and forth. And I had a lot of energy back then to do that. I don't know if I could do that now, but yeah, that's the short answer is when everyone else went to sleep. I cited that. We have a couple of nice people here. I know I do my work at ten o'clock til two in the morning every night. And I had colleagues and coauthors that were warning people. So we didn't always link up. But, but sneaking that time when everybody was asleep, seemed to help. Other suggestions or thoughts of how you him he has a deadline or so. Yeah. Without deadline, I think I want to move on. Each line is always the same thing as deadlines, accountability. Now, since he got his name is Mike, Mike Mikhail. I don't know how much extra mass. Yeah. So accountability or more. The coauthor, but I don't know better and our junior equity know that the Udi has huge faculty accountability program until I joined that accountability, the smalls is like a riding, riding club. So in my third year I joined as a UDL accountability or small group program. So they are signs. The three or four people between one small group and also they assigned a mentor there. So why me do is is we meet every week as we share our weekly product puberty goal. And we meet once a week and we tracked progress. And also we share strategies how to maintain a focus, our goal. So it was actually really helpful. I was only young person in my group from the learners that we all from different disciplines. It's one person from English aren't men, government from public policy. So even W0 from the different, of course. But still we share the same, same goal. So that the sharing that strategy and horse, so happy emotional support and having that body grew and was very helpful. And also it's good because we need it now because normally I say the rap hole, I don't even go to a trauma and I always all my teaching classroom ESA near my office. So we're having a meeting memory holes. There isn't a good to kind of get away from every MY everyday routine. And having the feeling that there is another person across campus sharing the same agony and sharing the same struggle was actually really helpful. So I check it if I came, that is a standard Udi has this accountability program. I actually really recommend that if any of you have interests and billing, a number of you brought up coauthors. And also the idea of having a research network. There's wonder if you could share any thoughts on what type of co-authors might you pick to work with is it's someone that compliments you. Is it's someone who's more like a mentor. And as you build your research network of people that you collaborate with, what does that look like? What do you think about? And what works? From a Hollywood? Yeah. No, I definitely go for accompaniment. So I've been working quite a lot with people who can do unbelievable things, including with underscore and other coauthors that I have. Not acuity. And actually d, By the way, I have really put a recluse actually. And what we cited papers where the break Andrew. So I mean, I try to collaborate with people who can do things that I cannot do in order to enhance the possibilities of what we can do. It is not easy. And I I have to say that it comes with a warning. So it is not easy sometimes to bridge gaps. Sometimes those papers are more difficult to publish. Sometimes you find that you can just chat more freely with people who are more similar to you. So all of that, again, comes with a warning. But my other advice is choose to work with people that you like. I, I don't necessarily mean like a friend. It can be your friend. But you need, you need to sort of think this, even though you can do different things in terms of your skills, you need to think in a similar way. And you need to have the work ethics should be similar. So that's sort of my, my advice. I enjoy, I enjoy a very diverse team of people. I would like to just comment on the compatibility issue that Howard mentioned in developing co-authorship. Because I think it's really important. I used to work with other people, asked me a similar question. I am often give them the analogy of a thinking of co-authorship, like a marriage. So you need to work with people that you can actually live with and you are happy to work to live with for, for, for relatively long term. Say you did. You're obviously look for people with complimentary skill sets, but also work ethic. And the your, your, your, your, your approach to the, the torch hurl your approach to your way of thinking about Austrians basically or war will, in terms of research, needs to be very much in sync. So, so thank him help for, for covering the compatibility issue. And you spend a lot of time and as people right? And strange hours in the evening, they did a paper that I lead targeted them know. Very sorry that I didn't say, how did you develop a research network? I mean, how do you find those people that Do the research that you do or are either had the same interests as you do? I'm speaking not only just from my direct personal experience, but also my experience in serving booze departments and colleges, P&T committee. I for years that really teach me that the committee I want to see the candidate and expand the hizo her network beyond her PhD advisor and community members. Because it's the Swedish lab, you have to develop XR relationship because they can really help that is really enhance the broader reputation because that play people talk role in Kenya review process. So because I always her college, the P&T committee, this person only has a paper with his pizza advisor. Somehow that it really works against. You know, unless you have 100 paper that is still ok. But if you only have a few, but that is airframe payroll wrote with your committee member or an advisor. That is I don't think that that is really good. So I think it's a good to find a research collaborator. I'll redeem the departments because they're the ones. I mean, now we are talking about copied, so he's now they apply, but they're the ones that you see maybe more often than your, your, your, your parents, right? So if you work, if phi is a good collaborator, VD departments and colleges, that is really good. But also yes, is equally good to find somebody outside, even people overseas so that we can leverage resource it between your institutions. But what I want to add is not just only academic collaborator, but also take advantage of industry network. They may not write paper together with you. But I don't know, maybe okay. That can be discipline-specific as maybe the hospitality specific, but you will be able to access to data and they may allow you to do the survey to their members or their employee. So and I felt like case sometimes because IIB may to some of them as merely my friend. Though when I create the sort of bag, I ask them to pre-review whether the language that I wrote is something is actually is really used in the real world that will need be deed ivory tower. Because I want to do a research can have impact on the industry, not only just read by nonlinearity darkening community. So yeah, so having their research advocate within the industry, I think that is also is really helpful. And I feel I'm looking. Yeah, sure. So we don't have a PhD program in marketing. And one of the things that isoprene joy to work with people who have PhD students. And so now that has become a major thing for me. So, you know, working with students at other universities just vertical. It can leverage your coauthor if they are at a university with PhD students. Yeah, great idea. Great idea. Although you and I were talking about networking and how to network at a conference and I think Zach asked a question about, you know, how do you develop your reputation, was wondering if we can shift the conversation to building a network, but also building your reputation in terms of how did how did you shared how you did that at a conference and I thought that was really good advice. How you networked at a conference and then helped to build your reputation as a woman. Or it's harder for women in general to attend as many conferences as you would if you didn't have children. If you're not the primary adhered caretakers. But attending conferences as absolutely essential for networking building. So when you think about prioritizing your time, your research writing comes first, but then right after probably comes the networking and conference attendance and going presenting your work at institutions? I would say never try as much as you possibly can to attend the major conferences. So for example, in economics, we have the National Bureau of Economic Research Summer Institute. That is the place where everybody goes, everybody who was anybody goes and presents and tens. And so, you know, if you don't attend to any other conference, this is the one to go, at least in our field. And it's really important to talk to people. You speaking about how do you find coauthors? I mean, this is how to find coauthors. This is how you find your potential future referees. This is how you meet people who will be editors of your journals. And if you go and you present your work and you talk to people, you know, try not to sit alone at a table, which sounds really silly. But if you're young and you're just starting out, this is sort of the way tend to be they are shy, you know, tried to come up to people and talk and listen to obviously listen to presentations and tried to make comments. But the more, the more conferences you're attend, the, the y there will be your network. Because people, people associate your face with your name and they associate your, your, your name with your work. And so eventually, the repetition. This is how you build your network of external reviewers. Because these will be the people writing your external letters for your tenure dossier. And so attending conferences, even though it's really hard and I had to. I had my first child as a Ph.D. students. So, you know, being a young faculty on tenure clock, whether newborn or, you know, one, two-year-old child attending conferences is really, really hard, but you really have to do it because that's the only, and now the food, Kobe, probably everything is going to be changing because everything is going to be electronic. And so you're basically it's I think and I don't know how we're going to be making connections, but that's a different story. But yeah, my advice is do not. If you if you go, you have to go at least one major conference here. You have to there's like no solution to that doubt. That's mine. So I think yeah, early eniac. Whoa. Well, I guess in addition to what, you know, what Olga said about the importance of networking, what I wanted to add is that as a junior faculty or even as a senior faculty, if you want to build reputation and will continue to expand reputation, just put yourself out there, okay, so what I'm Melba, that is creating as many opportunities for yourself to present, to discuss, to do revelry services as possible. All right? And then of course, when you get these opportunities, you know, treat these discussions or seminars or conference presentations. A representation like a chalk talk, because that's when you get the most exposure and you get these opportunities, you better you better know these opportunities. You don't want to present to the FFA or WMA and Gua. Alright, so doing a really good job in terms of discussing, discussing a paper, presented a paper at the major conferences and go a long way in building your reputation. And of course, you know what these top conference presentation opportunities, where discussion opportunities are harder to come by. So if you don't have these opportunities, then that by, but by putting yourself out there, what I meant is that, you know, do reach out to a nearby schools and see whether you can go in and do a, do a, do a seminar or a brand back. Okay? And again, you know, when you when you do have these chances, again, do a good job, because that's how you gradually be, would not be where your human capital, your reputation in the field, because it word got around if you do a really good job and of course we'll also get I wanted to do a bad. Okay. Yeah. But to get a different perspective from somebody can be Conference yes. City, OK. We know that by appending conference. So you can build, you can gain visibility and you can build a professional network, can also get great feedback on your paper. So that is, I mean, I have just, nobody's going to disagree with that. But that's one day as a new assistant professor, things, uh, you have to understand the difference between scholarly activity and scullery productivity. So if the slit activities, attending conferences and presenting your paper. That is, you have to do it. Yep. A steal that after combat, you can defeat bad. And you really have to make that conference proceeding at two to make it to submit to a journal paper. Because the reason I'm saying this because I serving college committee, I remember that there was a one candidate. He fought. She's so Miho package. And she has this many conference proceedings and attending many conference but subcommittee member set that. I showed me I have the commute the conference presentation where the paper where people come from that conference attendance. So that is outcome of conference. Certain tendencies should be come as journal paper because steel is kind of sad to say, but I did the day that is, the tenure will be decided upon how many people you have. So this is really more so conference presentation at a conference proceeding is not substitute for journal publications. So it's nice to have on your resume and nice to have full the networkings. And so these identities and getting feedback and know that, you know at one by your tenure. So once again, it can be maybe our fields. I think it may apply to everything. It does add something quick that when a paper gets accepted at a conference, usually they'll coauthors conside who the presenter is. And I always think that the person who meets the most visibility should be the one who makes the presentation. Some conference organizers want the most senior person to do it, but if possible, the one who needs the most visibility should do the presentation. And unlike a face said, if you ever volunteer to do a discussion, you do a really great job with that as well. That's, that's the only way to build up your visibility is to to make a lot of presentations. Thank you. I do want to leave some time for people to ask questions, so I want to ask the panelists one last question, sort of a very broad question. You can answer it any, any way or any area you want. But if you could go back in time and visit yourself when you were a newly minted PhD or when you first became an assistant professor, what would you tell yourself based on what you know now, with regards to the tenure and promotion process or doing research or being successful as a, as an academic. What would you go back and tell yourself when you were an assistant professor now that you are more mature and, and have been promoted and have tenure. Guess. I'll try first, just in terms of building up your package that you have to submit six or seven or eight years later. If you want to start from day one, you just start documenting everything that you do. Every referee report you write, you document every complementary or email that praises you for good teaching or good service you document. So that after so many years you don't have to go back and memorize or try to recall what you did so well, one bit of advice I got some or from a conference was I thought this is kind of crazy, but on your CV actually put down every presentation. But also write, write down the paper that you presented. And so they just sort of filling up your resume to be 910 pages. That was excessive. But he thought, well, you know what? It makes it easier to remember what you did nine years ago, years ago. So just be meticulous and documenting everything that you've scholarly, done scholarly between research, teaching, and service. And so when I put together my packet, I had emails from students from five years ago because they like my accounting class. Somehow I save that. And it was all in there. So not just saving teaching evaluations, but personal emails from students saying that they liked your class. So that's all created Race. One of the questions that we discussed, but I I think didn't come up is how to say no. And I just I just want to raise that point. Yeah, you should definitely think. And can also. So I am the marketing area head and I was the chair of the recruiting committee. And I take sort of like a personal care of like new hires and I guard them as much as they can. But in a when someone asks you to do something, think about whether it is good to say yes and, or whether it is good to say no and take care of yourself. Sometimes we don't know everything when we ask faculty to do something. So yes, definitely say no. I say no by the way, to a lot of review requests because my work is so interdisciplinary that I guess like from weird journals in finance, I get like a bunch of journals from engineering. So I only say yes to I triple E x. So I get like really all over the place in terms of real requests and I say, like, I just learned to say no quite often. So don't be a victim and take care of yourself. Take care of their department as well, and your chronic definitely take care of it. It's okay to be selected and fright you don't get to do everything. Yeah. Good point. I'll just add a couple of shore point. Y is to listen more to what your senior come off. My kids, listen more to what my colleagues and advisors and trust their friends say and act more and also act more patiently. So because, you know, when it comes to me, this this applies to both the p and he process as well as the publication process because both the process are can be long and require years of preparation and build up. So be patient with the process and make incremental investment in, in these aspects. And sometimes it's a couple of months or several months of difference is really nothing in the grand scheme of things. When it comes to papers. If you had to know what kind of paper for a couple of more months, unless you're going up for tenure next two months, working on it for a little bit more. This is probably not going to be, it's not going to enter the world. And actually I may make the difference between the getting armed on getting a check to the Doctorow? Oh, I mean, I my my my 11 of the advice would be have a very honest conversation when you chair the very clear what's expected, what, what is necessary. And as Nicol said, guard your time because, you know, people will ask you, do you sayings knowingly or unknowingly? And as a junior, it's really hard to say no, because your junior and you're afraid. But you have to find ideal a mentor within a department or outside of the department with whom you could discuss these things and get good advice. Because, you know, sometimes you the reaction is yes, I'm going to say yes just because the chair asked and I really cannot say no to my chair. But sometimes you really have to say no because your time you're not going to be promoted. If you did seven different services, but have only one publication, right? So your publication comes first. You have to be an excellent scholar. That'd be a good teacher. And service. Yes, it's important, but if you if you did not serve on a certain Committee, someone will be upset, but you will get tenured if you've published six papers, but there were seven papers but you didn't, you know, serve as whatever. Nand and the other advice is, really take good care of your mental health because the process is grueling and painful and very long. So you really have to find time not just to write and to work, but also to, to give yourself time to rejuvenate and enjoy the beautiful day outside. Oxygen is right, important for your brain development. So take good care of your mental health. And Joanne, you have the final word. Yeah. You know, we talk a little bit about the networking. Yeah, because air is peg, your process is done by people. Hey, so honestly they're always can be elements and some politics, they're just searching stand. Is it really important to have people within your department that can make a strong case for you. So try to have a good relationship and omega right relationship. But also at the same time, it's not good to have people read into the department, especially among people who respected senior faculty who will be against you. Because a tenure doesn't require just a majority vote, but it became a strong consensus, began to depart. So you don't want to have too close to call like Georgia. They decided to do. They'll be counting off board. You don't want to have that. You don't want that happening to you. You don't want to have 7268, even though you may has bad, but so you don't make a good friends and advocate within your department. And also try to find who will be the right person, who will fight for you if you are in trouble, hopefully you won't be in trouble if that happens. And there's one last thing, because radio system prophesied guys always said you are so busy and as your life is miserable, but enough because now I'm taking bad that you will never have a bowl free time. As, as Professor Dan, when you are on tenure, assistant professor, you actually have much more time because if you get tenure, you will have a more serves in comments and you have course I thought are dummies trace shared responsibility and duty is really enjoy being on tenure houses. Some focus. Great. I want to thank the Unfortunately we're out of time and I want to thank our panelist scholars for sharing their thoughts. And we'll give a zoom round of applause. It's not the same as being in person, but this is really great advice. And I want to thank all of you for sharing your thoughts and experiences with us. I wish I had heard this when I was an assistant professor. I don't think I'd have as much gray hair now if I if I did. But thank you all so much.
Lerner Faculty Showcase Panel Discussion 11.6.2020
From Kimberly Ragan November 12, 2020
5 plays
5
0 comments
0
You unliked the media.
Panel of Scholars: A lively discussion on the Research Process.
Olga Gorbachev, Assoc. Professor, Economics, Michal Herzenstein, Assoc. Professor, Marketing, Area-Head, Marketing, Michael Jung, Assoc. Professor, Accounting, Fei Xie, Professor, Finance, Iannaccone Faculty Fellow,
Joanne Yoo, Assoc. Professor, Hospitality Business Management, Assoc. Chair
These scholars will share their “secret sauce” on how to successful publish, get tenure and promoted
- Tags
- Department Name
- Lerner College
- Date Established
- November 06, 2020
- Appears In
Link to Media Page
Loading
Add a comment