Suchergebnisse

ABSTRACTThis paper introduces the review process to new researchers, describes the institutional background for reviews, and provides advice to reviewers. The objectives of a quality review are (1) to assist the editor in his/her gatekeeping role, and (2) to assist the authors in improving their work. We argue that the review process plays a critical role in the dissemination of research that ultimately provides credibility to the body of academic knowledge. This process relies on expert, anonymous reviews by established researchers (typically those who have already published in top journals on similar topics). Because reviewers are relatively scarce, and anonymous, the review process also relies on the personal ethics of reviewers. Invitations to review should only be accepted if the researcher has the skill, time, objectivity, and inclination to do a quality review. A quality review should consider the contribution, execution, and conclusions of the paper.

ABSTRACT
We offer advice to accounting faculty who have a growing level of seniority at their schools. Seniority is accompanied by increasing autonomy, and we encourage senior faculty to use that autonomy to focus their efforts on building up others. We offer recommendations on how to use seniority to positively impact one's department and college by practicing the tenants of servant leadership, and we discuss how this can be accomplished by examining the three facets of a faculty member's job description: research, service, and teaching. Our overarching goal is to encourage senior faculty to help address current challenges in both academia and practice as well as chart a future course that colleagues can follow that will strengthen the role of accounting to better serve society.

ABSTRACTSuccess in publishing accounting research often requires success in multiple coauthoring relationships. Given the importance and prevalence of coauthoring, our paper provides comprehensive advice to new accounting researchers on how to manage a coauthoring relationship, and includes views based on personal experience supplemented by feedback from an informal survey of some of the most productive accounting coauthor teams. We assert and conclude that a good coauthor establishes clear roles and expectations before a project begins, and keeps commitments. Communication throughout the project is essential as coauthors confront difficulties and setbacks. We conclude by discussing several situations that coauthors may confront, and provide recommendations.

ABSTRACTWe offer this paper as a primer for accounting doctoral students and new faculty on how to discuss a paper. We believe that this topic can serve to "jump start" the engagement of students and junior faculty in developing and delivering quality discussions. We begin by emphasizing the importance and benefits of being a good discussant to both the profession and the discussant. We then outline the discussion process and provide detailed suggestions on points to consider in each phase of this process: (1) volunteering to discuss, (2) receiving the discussion assignment, (3) preparing the discussion, (4) presenting the discussion, and (5) following up with the authors after the discussion. Next, we examine data that highlight the need for additional discussant volunteers at conferences. Finally, we present possible innovations to foster high-quality discussions. This paper formalizes the ideal process typically learned through years of mentoring and conference experience.

ABSTRACTWe revisit whether the academic accounting profession is in decline. Using data gathered from Hasselback Accounting Faculty Directory from 1974 to 2016, we confirm prior results indicating a decrease in the number of U.S. assistant accounting professors from 1991 to 2005. However, accounting faculty counts (including assistant professors) increased from 2005 to 2016. These results suggest that actions to slow and reverse the decline in the academic accounting profession, in combination with broad economic factors, have been largely successful. While future challenges remain, the academic accounting profession is no longer in decline.JEL Classifications: I23.

ABSTRACTThe purpose of this paper is to provide advice to accounting doctoral students and new accounting Ph.D.s on managing the review process. We also hope that our advice and suggestions will assist more experienced accounting faculty in their research endeavors. We offer suggestions from the point of view of researchers at various stages in their career. We also interview a variety of current and former journal editors and provide their suggestions and insights. We first provide suggestions to help position the article so as to receive a more helpful review. We then discuss strategies for responding to the editorial process and provide specific advice for handling various editorial decisions including a rejection, a reject-and-resubmit, a revise-and-resubmit, and an acceptance. We build upon prior research by providing a summary of advice for each type of editorial decision and by providing advice and suggestions from editors and associate editors at a wide range of accounting journals.