- Email: [email protected]
Multi-authors: A case for information management
international Journal of information Management (1991), 17 (166-l 68)
Multi-authors: A case for information management
D.S. GORDON, R.F. HALLIWELL, L.M. HARTLEY, E.E. HEEGER, J.M. HOROBIN, R.D. MURCH, J.M. POCOCK AND M.L. THOMAS
This paper proposes a structured framework to effectively the process of preparing a multi-authored
The authors are Scotland, UK.
at Dundee
University,
P. (1990). A one duy workshop. Writing up your research for publication, p. 4. Cambridge: Centre for Research into Human Communication and Learning. 'KERZNER, H. (1989). Project management. A systems upproach to planning, scheduling and control, 3rd edn. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold. 'HILLS,
166
plan, organize publication.
and
control
Writing up research and submitting it for publication can be a frustrating and discouraging experience. As academics we typically pride ourselves on our systematic and thorough approaches to research activities. Yet, when more than one author is preparing a paper, exasperating problems are often encountered and the process can end up disorganized with miserable results. It is a pity, therefore, that we cannot organize ourselves as well as we appear to organize our research activities. So why do these problems occur and how can we overcome them? This question was discussed at a recent Workshop’ on ‘Writing up your research for publication’ held at Dundee University. Eight members of academic staff, mainly from unrelated disciplines who had not met each other before the workshop, identified a number of problems in the process, such as poor communication, inadequate planning, and a lack of organization and control among the authors. The disputes covered issues of content, style, appearance, layout, choice of journal, responsibility for writing particular sections, and responsibility for editing the combined result. The order in which authors’ names should appear was a major cause for argument. From our discussions we recognized that the process of preparing multi-authored publications could be viewed as a group project that could be managed using basic project management principles. A project is defined by Kerzner* as a series of activities and tasks that have a specific objective, defined start and end dates, funding limits, and that consume resources (time, money, people, equipment). Sound project management involves planning, organizing and controlling the project; in this case, the process of preparing multi-authored publications. This process is not dissimilar to situations in commerce and industry where joint venture organizations regularly coordinate, prepare and publish detailed reports which are successfully multi-authored. Formalization of the process was considered the fundamental requirement and a framework to improve the process emerged from our discussions. We believe this framework provides a means to effectively plan, organize and control the process for a less traumatic and more successful outcome.
0268-4012/91/02
016603
0
1991 Butterworth-Heinemann
Ltd
D.S. GORDON et al.
The Framework Step 1 -plan
the process
Planning can be described as the decision-making process which establishes a course of action to achieve agreed objectives. It is therefore essential that all authors are involved at the outset to decide and agree on the objectives of the paper. It is recommended that a meeting be arranged with the group in an agreed location, to discuss the issues listed below. The group must first decide and agree on a coordinator who will be responsible to the group for the production of the paper. The coordinator should have the necessary leadership qualities to manage the group, and effective writing skills to edit the contributions, and he or she should be given the authority to implement the group’s wishes. All authors, regardless of status outside the group, are therefore subject to the constraints imposed on them through the coordinator. Junior members of a research team may find this a challenging new role which may be of significant value to them as it will improve their management skills and career progress. Once appointed, the coordinator will chair the meeting and will lead the discussion by seeking consensus on the following questions: WHAT has to be done? The coordinator structure of the paper and work activities within the framework of the objectives. It discussed and agreed upon at this meeting. to argue about what has to be done when
should invite ideas about the which must be agreed upon is advisable for all issues to be There is little point in trying the paper is being finalized.
WHY are the activities to be carried out? This relates to the objectives the group article is publication that, to be objectives what they
of and should be clearly identified. The journal in which the to be published must be agreed upon and the style of should suit the journal. Turk and Kirkman” stress the point effective, authors must think not only of their own aims and but also of the aims of their audiences: who they are, and need to know.
WHO has to do what? The duties and responsibilities of the coordinator should be clarified. Ideally, the coordinator will act as in-house editor and be responsible for the development of the final document. The duties and responsibilities of the other participants should then be agreed: who writes what, etc. The order of authors’ names must also be established at this stage. A recommended approach would be to use the coordinator’s name first or last, with the others following in alphabetical order. WHEN will the activities commence and finish? A realistic timetable must be agreed showing milestones for completion of the various sections or chapters, review periods, meetings, editing and final completion. This can simply be prepared as a typed list of activities and dates, or it can be graphically represented as a bar chart (Table 1). This will serve as a control tool for monitoring by the coordinator. %URK.
C. AND
KIRKMAN,
J.
(1989).
EffeC-
tive wiring. Improving sciekfic tech&al and business communication, 2nd edn. London: E. & F.N. Spon Ltd.
WHERE
should
different
countries
the activities take place? If the authors or institutions,
a location
must be agreed
are from upon from
167
Multi-authors Table 1. Bar chart outlining Activity
timetable
Calendar Week 1
Initial meeting Commence writing
Week 2
Week 3
Week 4
Week 5
xx
*************** **
Progress check Review drafts Meeting Rework drafts Finalization Submission
******xx* xx ********* xx******* **
which the publication will finally emerge. This is likely to be from the institution or department represented by the coordinator. However, this is subject to agreement by the authors. The location for the delivery of written drafts and review meetings must be decided. HOW are the activities to be implemented? Decisions on how the activities are to be implemented are crucial to minimizing conflict. The agreed structure of the paper and the involvement of all authors must be clearly maintained. Resolutions on how to deal with conflicts must be dealt with ‘up front’, i.e., authors wishing to withdraw, others wishing to contribute during the process, others not cooperating or meeting deadlines, communication problems, personality-ego problems. Step 2 -
write down the agreements
It is recommended that a summary of all the decisions and agreements reached collectively be written down by the coordinator in the form of a work plan. All authors must then be provided with this work plan following the initial meeting. This plan will serve as a yardstick against which performance will be monitored and controlled. Step 3 -
implement
the work plan
Implementation requires the coordinator to control the process. This is achieved by regularly evaluating individual progress and taking corrective action to achieve the group’s objectives. The coordinator must have the authority to act if authors are not conforming to the agreed work plan. Step 4 -submission Once the paper has been finally assembled and edited by the coordinator, the responsibility will rest with him or her to submit the paper in strict accordance with the specific instructions supplied by the journal.
Conclusion A successful outcome requires a disciplined approach, intellectual effort and a concerted management effort by the participants. We think our framework will assist in alleviating the unnecessary suffering experienced by many authors when preparing multi-authored publications. It certainly did in the preparation of this paper!
168
Multi-authors: A case for information management
D.S. GORDON, R.F. HALLIWELL, L.M. HARTLEY, E.E. HEEGER, J.M. HOROBIN, R.D. MURCH, J.M. POCOCK AND M.L. THOMAS
This paper proposes a structured framework to effectively the process of preparing a multi-authored
The authors are Scotland, UK.
at Dundee
University,
P. (1990). A one duy workshop. Writing up your research for publication, p. 4. Cambridge: Centre for Research into Human Communication and Learning. 'KERZNER, H. (1989). Project management. A systems upproach to planning, scheduling and control, 3rd edn. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold. 'HILLS,
166
plan, organize publication.
and
control
Writing up research and submitting it for publication can be a frustrating and discouraging experience. As academics we typically pride ourselves on our systematic and thorough approaches to research activities. Yet, when more than one author is preparing a paper, exasperating problems are often encountered and the process can end up disorganized with miserable results. It is a pity, therefore, that we cannot organize ourselves as well as we appear to organize our research activities. So why do these problems occur and how can we overcome them? This question was discussed at a recent Workshop’ on ‘Writing up your research for publication’ held at Dundee University. Eight members of academic staff, mainly from unrelated disciplines who had not met each other before the workshop, identified a number of problems in the process, such as poor communication, inadequate planning, and a lack of organization and control among the authors. The disputes covered issues of content, style, appearance, layout, choice of journal, responsibility for writing particular sections, and responsibility for editing the combined result. The order in which authors’ names should appear was a major cause for argument. From our discussions we recognized that the process of preparing multi-authored publications could be viewed as a group project that could be managed using basic project management principles. A project is defined by Kerzner* as a series of activities and tasks that have a specific objective, defined start and end dates, funding limits, and that consume resources (time, money, people, equipment). Sound project management involves planning, organizing and controlling the project; in this case, the process of preparing multi-authored publications. This process is not dissimilar to situations in commerce and industry where joint venture organizations regularly coordinate, prepare and publish detailed reports which are successfully multi-authored. Formalization of the process was considered the fundamental requirement and a framework to improve the process emerged from our discussions. We believe this framework provides a means to effectively plan, organize and control the process for a less traumatic and more successful outcome.
0268-4012/91/02
016603
0
1991 Butterworth-Heinemann
Ltd
D.S. GORDON et al.
The Framework Step 1 -plan
the process
Planning can be described as the decision-making process which establishes a course of action to achieve agreed objectives. It is therefore essential that all authors are involved at the outset to decide and agree on the objectives of the paper. It is recommended that a meeting be arranged with the group in an agreed location, to discuss the issues listed below. The group must first decide and agree on a coordinator who will be responsible to the group for the production of the paper. The coordinator should have the necessary leadership qualities to manage the group, and effective writing skills to edit the contributions, and he or she should be given the authority to implement the group’s wishes. All authors, regardless of status outside the group, are therefore subject to the constraints imposed on them through the coordinator. Junior members of a research team may find this a challenging new role which may be of significant value to them as it will improve their management skills and career progress. Once appointed, the coordinator will chair the meeting and will lead the discussion by seeking consensus on the following questions: WHAT has to be done? The coordinator structure of the paper and work activities within the framework of the objectives. It discussed and agreed upon at this meeting. to argue about what has to be done when
should invite ideas about the which must be agreed upon is advisable for all issues to be There is little point in trying the paper is being finalized.
WHY are the activities to be carried out? This relates to the objectives the group article is publication that, to be objectives what they
of and should be clearly identified. The journal in which the to be published must be agreed upon and the style of should suit the journal. Turk and Kirkman” stress the point effective, authors must think not only of their own aims and but also of the aims of their audiences: who they are, and need to know.
WHO has to do what? The duties and responsibilities of the coordinator should be clarified. Ideally, the coordinator will act as in-house editor and be responsible for the development of the final document. The duties and responsibilities of the other participants should then be agreed: who writes what, etc. The order of authors’ names must also be established at this stage. A recommended approach would be to use the coordinator’s name first or last, with the others following in alphabetical order. WHEN will the activities commence and finish? A realistic timetable must be agreed showing milestones for completion of the various sections or chapters, review periods, meetings, editing and final completion. This can simply be prepared as a typed list of activities and dates, or it can be graphically represented as a bar chart (Table 1). This will serve as a control tool for monitoring by the coordinator. %URK.
C. AND
KIRKMAN,
J.
(1989).
EffeC-
tive wiring. Improving sciekfic tech&al and business communication, 2nd edn. London: E. & F.N. Spon Ltd.
WHERE
should
different
countries
the activities take place? If the authors or institutions,
a location
must be agreed
are from upon from
167
Multi-authors Table 1. Bar chart outlining Activity
timetable
Calendar Week 1
Initial meeting Commence writing
Week 2
Week 3
Week 4
Week 5
xx
*************** **
Progress check Review drafts Meeting Rework drafts Finalization Submission
******xx* xx ********* xx******* **
which the publication will finally emerge. This is likely to be from the institution or department represented by the coordinator. However, this is subject to agreement by the authors. The location for the delivery of written drafts and review meetings must be decided. HOW are the activities to be implemented? Decisions on how the activities are to be implemented are crucial to minimizing conflict. The agreed structure of the paper and the involvement of all authors must be clearly maintained. Resolutions on how to deal with conflicts must be dealt with ‘up front’, i.e., authors wishing to withdraw, others wishing to contribute during the process, others not cooperating or meeting deadlines, communication problems, personality-ego problems. Step 2 -
write down the agreements
It is recommended that a summary of all the decisions and agreements reached collectively be written down by the coordinator in the form of a work plan. All authors must then be provided with this work plan following the initial meeting. This plan will serve as a yardstick against which performance will be monitored and controlled. Step 3 -
implement
the work plan
Implementation requires the coordinator to control the process. This is achieved by regularly evaluating individual progress and taking corrective action to achieve the group’s objectives. The coordinator must have the authority to act if authors are not conforming to the agreed work plan. Step 4 -submission Once the paper has been finally assembled and edited by the coordinator, the responsibility will rest with him or her to submit the paper in strict accordance with the specific instructions supplied by the journal.
Conclusion A successful outcome requires a disciplined approach, intellectual effort and a concerted management effort by the participants. We think our framework will assist in alleviating the unnecessary suffering experienced by many authors when preparing multi-authored publications. It certainly did in the preparation of this paper!
168