"Academic Productivity – What is it? What Causes it? How is it Achieved?

Presentation to doctoral symposium, Syracuse University

April 26, 2006

Barry BozemanRegents Professor of Public PolicyGeorgia Tech

After August 1: Crenshaw Professor of Public PolicyUniversity of Georgia

Ways of Thinking about Academic Productivity

Output: Publications and ‘knowledge outputs’ (e.g. patents, technical assistance)

Impact: Impacts of knowledge outputs (Scholarly and practitioner)

RVM Approach: “Scientific and Technical Human Capital” (career trajectories and field changes)

What is “Scientific and Technical Human Capital” (S&THC)?

S&THC is the amalgamation of:

1. The individual’s endowments and abilities-– Formal training– Craft knowledge and tacit knowledge– Cognitive skills– Intelligence– Creativity

– (i.e. capacity to produce knowledge)

Source: B. Bozeman, J. Dietz and M. Gaughan (2001) “Scientific and technical human capital,” International Journal of Technology Management, 22, 7/8, 2001, 716-740

What is “Scientific and Technical Human Capital” (S&THC)?

And…,

2. Social ties and network linkages Formal social linkages (e.g. professional

Association relations) Informal linkages (e.g. acquaintances,

professional friends)– (i.e. capacity to disseminate and utilize

knowledge)

Scientific and Technical Human Capital Mapping: The Life Cycle

Cognitive Skills

Knowledge

Craft Skills

Research Project

Cognitive Skills

Knowledge

Craft Skills

Team Member (t - 1)

Cognitive Skills

Knowledge

Craft Skills

Team Member (t + 1)Team Member (t)

Legend

Weak Tie

Strong Tie

Barry Bozeman, 1999

Conventional academic productivity models

Focus on publications, quantity and sometimes quality

Use citation analysis and bibliometric approaches (impact studies)

Sometimes focus on life cycle Most studies focused on production of

refereed articles Typical independent variables: gender, age

and tenure, field, collaboration patterns, education

Technical issues

Normal or fractional count? Author order effects Negative citations and literature

reviews, self-citations Citations in books Name distinctiveness Field/Discipline citation propensities

Review of Academic Productivity Studies

Study Dependent Variables

Disciplines and Fields

Results

Wanner, et al. (1981)

Article and Book Counts (Department)

Social sciences, physical sciences

Physical sciences publish more and have very different norms, not comparable with social sciences

Clemente (1973)

Article counts (Individual)

Physical sciences Best predictors: age at first publication; having published before Ph.D.

Keith and Babchuk

DepartmentRankings

Sociology Past reputation much more important that current productivity

Pfeffer and Langdon (1993)

Article counts (Department)

Social sciences, physical sciences

The higher the wage dispersion in department, the lower the productivity

Review of Academic Productivity Studies (continued)

Study Dependent Variables

Disciplines and Fields

Results

Fox (1989) Individual publication counts

Sociology High rejection rates function of disciplinary fragmentation (Kuhn)

Lee and Bozeman (2005)

Individual publication counts

Physical sciences and engineering

Collaboration positive for “normal count,” neutral for “fractional count”; women have fewer collaborators

Varian (1998)

Individual publication counts

Physical sciences and engineering

Women publish 50-80% as as many articles as men, on average (gap narrowing; no difference in economics)

Armstrong(1983)

Individual publication counts

Physical and social sciences

Best predictor: quality of undergraduate degree (doctoral degree secondary)

Review of Academic Productivity Studies (continued)

Study Dependent Variables

Disciplines and Fields

Results

Feldt, 1986 Grants and publications

Physical sciences Women receive fewer grants (publish less)

Gaughan and Bozeman, 2002

Grants and publications

Physical sciences Women receive about same number of grants, lower amounts, until 5th grant (bi-polar distribution

Xie and Aiken

Article publications

Physical sciences Women produce less because more likely junior faculty (hired more recently)

Dietz (2004) Article publications

Physical sciences Research Center affiliates more productive

Submitting to Journals

First- what are you hoping to achieve?

Intellectual impact, force of ideas Career enhancement

Acquire or improve job Develop reputation Move to a new or different field Tenure trajectory Develop network ties

Impact on practitioners or policy

What are the mechanics of submission?

Read the journal requirements. Don’t worry initially about formatting. Don’t write a long letter (or email).

e.g. “Dear Dr. Schmidlap, I would like to submit the enclosed paper, entitled “A Preliminary Analysis of Libertarian Voting Patterns in Butts County, Georgia, 1975-1976,” for possible publication in the Journal of Rural Voting Behavior. Thank you for considering my submission.

Prepare to wait. Prepare (at best) to get harsh criticism and an R&R. This is a

GOOD letter: e.g. Dear Ms. Student, I am afraid the referees have concluded

that your paper is not in its present form suitable for publication in JRVB. However, we will see a revised version. I cannot promise you a revised version will result in publication.

What are the mechanics of publication?

If you receive an R&R the odds are about 85% that your paper will be published (somewhat less at the most competitive journals).

You may have to revise more than once. When you revise, pay attention first to the editor, then

the referees. But also don’t relent on points that will make the paper worse.

After submission it will take from two months to two years for publication.

You will usually get a chance to copy edit the final proof. You will usually get 50 or so free reprints to distribute

(policies vary on electronic copies to distribute). You will either co-own or not own the rights to the

reproduction of your article.

Norms you may not know about

You cannot submit a paper to more than one journal at the same time.

When your paper is rejected, it is a good idea to revise before sending out again (you may get the same referees).

Acknowledge anyone who has helped you in any way. Generosity costs you nothing.

Some journals permit you (or even prefer) that you nominate a few reviewers for your submission.

Review is generally, but not always, “double blind.”

Different Career Stages Need Different Strategies

Graduate student Ph.D. non-academic Ph.D. with no tenure-track job Ph.D. beginning a tenure track job Junior faculty with tenure coming up soon Senior faculty, moderate productivity Senior faculty, academic star or star

aspirant

If you are a student…

All publications are good publications. A publication in a journal shows activity and distances you from most students.

Regardless of journal, the work signals your career interests

Conference presentations and book reviews “count” (but they won’t later)

If you are not a student, remember the following sober facts:

1. The median number of citations for a paper published in a social science academic journal is zero.

2. Some journals, including ones you may have heard of, give you a miniscule chance of ever having your article cited.

3. Why worry about citations?

Total Citations in 2002: Selected Journals

Journal Citations

Amer. J. Political Sci. 5060

Adm Sci. Q. 4713

Hum Rel. 1909

Res Policy 1646

Pub Adm Rev 922

Scientometrics 769

Ev. Prog. Planning 468

J. Policy Analysis Mgt. 421

Sci, Tech, Hum Values 396

Int. J. Tech. Mgt. 318

Pol. St. J. 236

Adm&Soc 173

Issues S&T 145

ARPA 103

J. Per. Soc. Psy.: 23,936Soc Theory & Meth: 2

Policy/PA Journal Impact Factors (2004)

Calculation for journal impact factor (excludes self-citations).

A= total cites in 1992, B= 1992 cites to articles published in 1990-91 (this is a subset of A), C= number of articles published in 1990-91D= B/C = 1992 impact factor.

The impact factor is useful in clarifying the significance of absolute (or total) citation frequencies. It eliminates some of the bias of such counts which favor large journals over small ones, or frequently issued journals over less frequently issued ones, and of older journals over newer ones. Particularly in the latter case such journals have a larger citable body of literature than smaller or younger journals. All things being equal, the larger the number of previously published articles, the more often a journal will be cited.

Impact Factors for familiar journalsJournal: High Performers Factor Journals: Below the

Mendoza LineFactor

Amer. Pol. Sci. Rev. 2.744 Econ. Dev. Q. .460

J. Pol. Econ. 2.622 Public Choice .401

Amer. J. Pol. Sci. 1.894 Public Interest .276

Amer. Econ. Rev. 1.655 Pol. St. J. .262

Research Policy 1.536 Austr. J. P.A. .224

JPAM 1.240 Int. Rev. Adm. Sci. .246

Pub. Adm. (UK) 1.139 Adm. & Soc. .232

J. Amer. Plan. Assoc. .911 Pub. Per. Mgt. .192

JPART .887 Can. Pub. Adm. .156

PAR .861

Policy Sci. . 576

Pub. Adm. Dev. .534

Amer. Rev. PA .513

Journal prestige: How important?

Often much more difficult to get published in “mainstream” and disciplinary journals (rejection rates hover around 95%).

Sometimes impact factors of “prestige journals” or not the highest, but prestige has its own currency (showing you can jump a high bar).

Even if no more citations or readers, may enhance your status as “gatekeeper.”

What about less prestigious journals?

Divide into three categories: A. Someone is likely to read the journal and cite

you B. It is possible, but unlikely, that someone will

read and cite you C. Dream on. Lesson: Take care with the “B” category (the

most populated)- some have relatively high rejection rates, require many changes, but don’t have much impact.

What about “invitations to submit?” and special issues

Distinguish among “casting calls,” editor desperation and actual opportunity. Are the invitations directed to you

specifically? Do you have some obvious substantive

or expertise advantage? Are invitations focused on a particular

paper of yours? Does the person inviting you know you

personally?

Scenario: you are seeking academic impact, but you are currently an “unknown”

Regardless of journal publication, consider working with someone who is NOT an unknown (Matthew Effects be damned).

Regardless of journal quality, begin thinking about journal clusters. Do not spread your intellectual seed to thin.

Regardless of journal quality, work to disseminate your publications

Scenario: you are seeking academic impact, but you are currently an “unknown” (continued)

Know the impact factor of your journal set. Regardless of the impact factor, know the

substantive focus of your journal. Don’t put a good paper in a good journal that does not deal with your topic.

Understand the probabilities of publication. Think about tiers (didn’t make the first tier

journal, what is the next one?) Get pre-submission criticism. If very

positive, do not undervalue your paper.

Honing in…

OK, now that you have identified the content area and the prestige level (impact factor) of the target journals, what are some other cues you may wish to consider in finalizing your decision? Who is the editor? What is the editor’s role? Who is on the editorial board? Who has been publishing in the journal (they will be

your reviewers!) What is the characteristic set of methods used in

published papers? Length? Can you determine if there is a backlog?

The journal as “sign”

The journals you publish in will shape your professional identify. For example, Organization Studies, Organizational Dynamics, and Academy of Management Journal cover many of the same topics but in completely different ways.

Journals signify different cognitive emphases: creativity, analytical ability, modeling, methods, theory, values. Which of these attributes do you wish to advertise?

And now- The public administration studies

Questionnaire StudiesReputational Studies

Public Administration Review • January/February 2004, Vol. 64, No. 1

Surveyed the top 89 public administration scholars (nominated by leaders of five organizations) and asked them to rank characteristics related to their success.

Factors Ranked High (Top 15)

15: Winning awards M (Bozeman Rank)

14: Jointly-authored articles H13: Leadership in organizations M12: Faculty mentors in Ph.D. program L11: Grants and research support H10: Seizing research opportunities H9: Jointly-authored books H8: Quality (not rank) of Ph.D. program M7: Cutting Edge Research Topics M6: Presenting scholarly papers L5: Single-authored articles H4: Journal editor H3: Timing/luck M2: Single-authored books H1: Hard Work M

Adapted from Schroeder, et al., 2004

H: High Importance; M: Medium; L: Low

Public Administration Review, 1981

Compared reputation ratings of programs vs. numbers of publications in top 20 journals (did NOT take department size into account)

Another Measure: The productivity of research Graduates(Adams, Public Administration Review, 1996)

Faculty Productivity (not per capita)

(Adams, Public Administration Review, 1996)

Individual Productivity:Guidelines that have worked for me

Do not spend much time scheming or griping- work hard and do research you enjoy

Carefully evaluate collaborators and collaboration opportunities

Don’t be exploited by lazy or mediocre colleagues Understand the transactions costs of doctoral

student mentoring (and do it because it is important, not because it is productive)

Set for yourself reasonable, measurable goals each year

More productivity ideas: Avoid meetings unless they are vital or research

related or fun Cultivate solitude (the ability to be at your work

desk) Don’t waste time with zero impact journals Track your citations and know how to interpret them If you are not surrounded by a “productivity culture,”

either make your own (networks) or get a new job Determine if you enjoy research (“sacred spark”)

and, if you do not, invest in other productive activities (e.g. quality teaching)

Last…

Don’t spend too much time in seminars listening to other’s ideas!

(But thanks for coming).

More info:

www.rvm.gatech.edu