1. Iris S. Wolstein Professor
EMS Conference, 11 Sep 2016
Paris, France
Kalle Lyytinen
Iris S. Wolstein Professor

2. Agenda 1) Why to have a journal for the practitioner- scholar?
2) Status of Journal
3) Observations
4) Format of an Empirical Submission
5) Suggestions for Way Ahead

3. 1) Why to have a journal? Three different identities (and worldviews)
(PRACTITIONERS LEARN) THE SCHOLAR’S
VIEW OF THE WORLD
(The traditional scholar world)
THE RESULT IS A UNIQUE VIEW BY THE
PRACTITIONER-SCHOLAR
(The EDBAC graduate)
PRACTITIONER’S
VIEW OF THE WORLD
No dedicated outlet for the Practitioner-Scholar;
No body of literature to reinforce our identity

4. 1) Finding a voice in the publishing landscape
PRACTITONER/SCHOLAR
VIEW EMBEDDED IN THE PRACTITIONER WORLD
Professional
magazines
(examples)
Relevance
EMR
SCHOLAR’S
VIEW OF PRACTITIONER WORLD WHILE EMBEDDED IN THE SCHOLARLY WORLD
HBR
Sloan
CMR
Industry
Specific
PRACTITONER VIEW OF THE PRACTITIONER WORLD
Academic
Journals
(examples)
Org sci
AMR
AMJ
ASQ
MISQ
SCHOLAR’S
VIEW OF THE SCHOLARLY WORLD
Rigor

5. 2) Status of Journal – Aims/Goals
To promote knowledge produced with managers, by managers and for managers.
To strengthen practitioner scholars and engagement management research
To provide timely, reliable evidence to managerial problems that have significant implications for practice

6. 2) EMR Journal Genres Three types of articles Empirical Essay
Qualitative, quantitative, mixed methods
Has a unique format – discussed later in slides
Essay
Three types – each with a format but very open format:
Research survey: review of literature surrounding a practice- based problem or issue
Theory review: identify and justify why a theory in a non- management field should be applicable to management
Engaged scholarship debate: examines engaged management phenomena and methods
Translation
This is especially targeted for alumni of EDBAC programs
Reports how engaged managed scholar’s research has been put into practice

7. 3) Observations after two years
There is not yet a shared understanding of EMR goals
Finding the sweet spot between academic/practitioner
Currently submissions and review criteria leaning toward an academic journal
Reviewers/Editors are defaulting to what they know
Associate editors/reviewers use same standards as traditional scholarly journals – even EDBAC alumni reviewers
Similar to phenomenon Banerjee & Morley (2013) AMLE found— but with respect to DBA theses—in the UK and Australia
Reviewers often do not recognize there is an EMR format
This is especially the case for empirical papers; the authors use the format but negative reviews are made about their format
The format is designed intentionally to create a branded format to capture BOTH practitioner and scholarly voices

8. 4) EMR: Empirical Format
Abstract
Synopsis
Methods (short and quick)
Main Body
Required Appendix for Methods

9. 4) EMR: Empirical Format
Each section requires the author to speak in either a “scholarly” voice or a “practitioner” voice
Scholarly voice:
Uses controlled and technically precise language only understandable to academia
Priority is on knowledge development and methodology
Requires translation for practitioner use
Practitioner voice:
Uses language found in everyday contexts of the problem of practice
Priority is on the solution to a real-world problem
Intuitively understandable and immediately reusable by the manager for his/her everyday contexts

10. 4) EMR: Abstract (200 words max)
State the core issue (i.e., purpose) of the research
Briefly describe the methods and sample
Describe the findings
Interpret the results, what the implications are
Written to the voice of the scholar.

11. 4) EMR: Synopsis (800 words max)
Purpose: one or two sentences
Problem of Practice: one paragraph
Results: one paragraph
Conclusions: one paragraph
Practical Relevance: one paragraph
Keywords
This section is an overview.
Written to the voice of the practitioner.

12. 4) EMR: Methods (200 words max)
Research Question: one or two sentences
Method/Design: one paragraph
Type of method (e.g., qualitative study using interviews)
Type of analysis used (e.g., grounded theory)
Validity/reliability issues (e.g., generalizability)
Sample: one paragraph
If qualitative: e.g., for interviews - kinds of people interviewed, how accessed
If quantitative: e.g., for surveys – no. of surveys, no. of responses, who sent to, how accessed
This section is an overview.
Written to the voice of the scholar.
Details go in the mandatory Appendix.

13. 4) EMR: Main Body (3,000 words max)
(1) Practical Problem (practitioner voice)
(2) Literature Review (scholarly voice)
(3) Findings (practitioner voice)
(4) Lessons for Practice (practitioner voice)
(5) Contributions to Theory (scholarly voice)
Description for each section is provided in back up slides.

14. 4) EMR: Main Body – 1st section
The Practical Problem
In plain language, give reader the inside view of the problem you are dealing with
The reader should get a visceral feeling for what is at stake
Identify what problem you are trying to answer
Few citations are necessary since this section is the practitioner’s view of the problem
Written to the voice of the practitioner

15. 4) EMR Main Body – 2nd section
The Literature Review
Telling the reader what scholars know about the general or specific problem and related subject area
Identifying what is not known
Organize this section by main research ideas
Citations are necessary in this section – although the intent of the Empirical paper is EMR is to reduce extensive citation usage, targeting about 20 citations total
Written to the voice of the scholar

16. 4) EMR Main Body – 3rd section
The Findings
What your research found
Organize into main subheadings
Try to limit the findings to 3-5 big ideas
The section should be understandable by the practitioner; it should not be overly technical, which is what the Appendix is for
Written to the voice of the practitioner

17. 4) EMR Main Body – 4th section
The Lessons for Practice
Identify realistic ways of implementing ideas
This is the most difficult section since it is only the practitioner who understands the context of what has a chance of working, yet the research findings are conceived in a more general or abstract space
This section is usually the least important in academic programs; here is where the practitioner- scholar can shine
Written to the voice of the practicing manager

18. 4) EMR Main Body – 5th section
The Contribution to Theory
Focus on 1-3 big implications of “so what”
Should be tied to something discussed in the Literature Review section
Should be interesting: a theory or set of findings that refute, change, challenge, and/or expand what is previously known
A study that “confirms” what is known is not interesting
Written to the voice of the scholar

19. 4) EMR Methods Appendix (1,000 words)
Required Section
Aspects of methodology needing more details
Areas that need clarification
Areas that need amplification
(We do not know yet how much is too much technical detail.)
Written to the voice of the scholar

20. 5) Way Ahead
Quantity: ideas for achieving a shared understanding of EMR goals and format
Long Term: The number EDBAC schools is increasing
Near Term: Introduce EMR Empirical submission requirement into EDBAC school curricula
Quality: barriers to overcome in submission
Ambidextrous presentation style needed: both scholarly and practitioner voices (we forget the practitioner voice)
Consistent with recommendations, in general, about MBA and professional doctorates thesis – need both voices
Huff (2000) and Banerjee & Morley (2013) need for “Mode 1.5”
Lacking a Compelling problem of practice: need practitioner relevance (“so what?”)
Not breaking new ground: Need research that produces changed views about theory, the practice, or prior research

21. Questions?