I will get on with my thoughts on what makes a good research question soon but today I want to thank the various journals and universities that have asked me to opine on various articles and promotion decisions over the past few months. Yes, I speak of the role of ” lowly ” reviewer!
It is nice to be getting back into life as a regular academic and that brings requests to do reviews. I have done six of them in the last month and while I would not want to maintain that pace all year I must say it is good to be back. While editors get the headlines, the single most important role is that of a reviewer. In essence the reviewer determines the life or death of a paper. It is the closest we mere mortals get to playing ” god”!
So while we might look on these low profile, non- paying for the most part (JAR and JAE excepted), roles as reviewers, they are the lifeblood of academic excellence.
I also want to thank the journals that have asked me to be an Associate editor, editorial board member and ad hoc editor. As I said it is fun to be back doing important work!
I was recently asked to participate in a study of “why co-author in accounting research?”
While it strokes ones ego to be asked, at the same time I am struck with the thought – what can we learn from such a study that will help us understand and interpret accounting better????
Are we as a research community so anal that we now need to study why some work at the research production function in groups while others go it alone?
If the scholars doing this has been sociologists studying obscure professional groups on a comparative basis I could see some knowledge being created that might be usable in a broader context. However, no matter how I look at this study I cannot understand how it does more than appeal to the prurient interests of accounting researchers.
That begs the question that I am going to reflect on and share my thoughts about over the next little while – what makes a good research question.
This in part stems from my observations at the two recent mid-year meetings I attended – no one sets out to do irrelevant research yet much is deemed just that. How did we get from here to there???