Editorial

SEVEN YEAR ITCH

In the 1955 film, The Seven Year Itch, Marilyn Monroe’s dress famously blows up over a subway grating, tempting men into infidelity after seven years of marriage.  Although not the phrase’s original meaning –  it referred to a now forgotten irritating and contagious skin infection lasting seven years – today it is used more generally to refer to an urge to move on from any situation, although not necessarily after seven years.

As we enter our seventh year of publication, however, we are indeed itching to move on.  Our first six years have built a strong foundation for the journal. 

·         We assembled an outstanding international editorial board who have cemented SO!s reputation for providing timely, informed and developmental review process of the highest quality – and for accepting only the very best work.

·         We attracted strong article and essay submissions focused on the intersection of strategy and organization theory from scholars in Asia, Australia, Europe, the Middle East and North America. 

·         We achieved worldwide accessibility through institutional and individual subscriptions, and witnessed soaring article and essay downloads from so.sagepub.com at SAGE Journals Online.

·         We secured coverage in the ISI’s Web of Knowledge, which began with Volume 5 (2007), and will have our first official ‘impact factor’ for 2009 published in 2010.

In a very short time, SO! has established a clear place for itself in the field.

‘Unofficial’ Impact Factor

Web of Knowledge began covering SO! in 2007, and as a result, SO!s first ‘official’ impact factor will be for 2009.  Because it will be based on citations in 2009 to articles published in 2007 and 2008, the impact factor will not be published until 2010.  Until then, we will continue to provide our own ‘unofficial’ impact factor, as well as other evidence of SO!s impact on the field.

If SO! had been accepted to the Web of Knowledge in 2005, its 2007 impact factor (58 citations in 2007 to 33 articles and essays published in 2005 and 2006), would be 1.75, placing it 21st among the 81 management journals currently covered, up from 24th of 78 in 2006.[1]

Further evidence of SO!’s impact is found in a recent ranking of strategy journals published in the Journal of Economics and Management Strategy.[2]  This study indicates that, during its first three years of publication, SO! ranked second behind only the Strategic Management Journal in number of citing articles per paper.  The study’s authors conclude that:

“SO! made an impressive entry to the field: in 2003-2006 it ranks second in per article impact and fourth in overall impact, despite being established only in 2003. This shows … that while it often takes time to achieve a leading position (which requires coordination of expectations among authors, readers, reviewers, and editors, and therefore is usually a long process), it is not impossible to do so quickly. Hard work and enthusiasm of the founding editors, recruitment of leading people in the field to the editorial board, and finding a unique scope on which the journal focuses, seem to be necessary to allow such quick and successful entry” (Azar and Brock, 2008: 795).

This is impressive for such a young journal; but our aspirations for 2010 are much higher.  You can help assure that SO!’s first ‘official’ impact factor is commensurate with its standing as a leading journal in the fields of strategy and organization by getting into the habit – now – of citing articles appearing in SO!

SO!WHAT Award for Scholarly Contribution.  Last year we initiated the “SO!WHAT” awards for scholarly contribution – one for the most outstanding article and one for the most outstanding essay published in SO! five years earlier – to recognize exceptional contributions to the field of strategic organization.

The award winners are selected by the coeditors, in consultation with the journal’s editorial board, after considering citations in the Web of Knowledge and Google Scholar, downloads from so.sagepub.com, as well as qualitative evidence of the publication’s impact on subsequent research.  Recipients receive a plaque commemorating the award and a five-year subscription to SO!

This year’s winners, selected from in Volume 2 (2004), presented along with some of our editorial board members’ reactions to these outstanding contributions, are:

Best Article:

Organizing Practice in Services to Capture Knowledge for Innovation

Deborah Dougherty, SO! 2(1)

Our knowledge of the innovation process in service industries lags far behind that of product-based industries.  Dougherty cuts to the essence of what makes the service context unique, and through analysis of detailed, rich data on innovation practices in nine service organizations, gives us significant insights. She identifies mechanisms to address the considerable challenge of capturing the knowledge embedded in service activities – knowledge that is crucial for innovation – and in doing so, strikes the ideal balance of providing intriguing insights for scholars and making useful prescriptions for managers.”  Mary Tripsas, Harvard Business School, Harvard University

 

“Reflecting the new practice sensibility in organization and strategy studies, this paper builds on rich, qualitative data to develop subtle and original insights about innovation on the ground.  In particular, Dougherty's distinction between 'pro-practice' and 'anti-practice' principles of organizing offers two crisp and striking concepts that will sensitise both scholars and practitioners to oft-neglected features of innovation success and failure. This paper is sure to motivate future attention to the importance of the fine detail of work in organizational innovation and strategy.”  Richard Whittington, Saïd Business School, Oxford University

Best Essay:

The Disintegration of Strategic Management: It’s Time to Consolidate Our Gains

            Donald C. Hambrick, SO! 2(1)

Hambrick … is right on in suggesting that strategic management has become overly populated by researchers who, due to the strictures of journals, are bent on extending any current theoretical perspective by deploying some conceptual or empirical quibble.  Ultimately, there is too little bridging of perspectives, too little problem- (and solution-) driven research, and too little attention paid to process, implementation and design.  Congratulations, Don, on a timely recognition of these disturbing trends.  Danny Miller, HEC - Montreal

Hambrick’s essay is a provocative call for strategy research to undertake four tasks: (1) pay more attention to processes and people, (2) give replication more credit to develop more nuanced understanding of the phenomena we study, (3) make theory building less central to increase our ability to study important empirical phenomena, and (4) emphasize filling in existing theories rather than generating new ones.  Agree or disagree, these are useful points of debate.  For the record, I agree strongly with points 1 and 2 [and] 3 ... so long as we frame such work in generalizable ways.  I disagree with point 4: while I welcome efforts to fill in existing theories, we ... need new theory development to tackle phenomena that existing theories cannot explain no matter how filled in and nuanced they become.  Don:  thanks for giving the debate a jump start.  Will Mitchell, Fuqua School of Business, Duke University

Editorial Review Process

To ensure a high-quality and timely review process for our authors, we maintain a working, international editorial board of 100 leading scholars and researchers with sufficiently broad in expertise to carry out all the journal’s reviewing; SO! uses no ad hoc reviewers.  Each year, we refresh the Board, creating opportunities for 10-15 new top-notch scholars to contribute to SO!s further advance, and thank our past board members by releasing them from further duty!

Our authors deserve timely feedback and expect that editorial feedback and decisions will be constructive, informed, and challenge them to improve their work. 

·         Authors whose work is not sent out for editorial review, either because it does not fit the journal’s aims and scope, or because it is not developed sufficiently for our one-revision editorial policy, receive a letter explaining the decision from the coeditors within 10-14 days. 

·         Manuscripts accepted for full review are sent (double-blind) to three editorial board members who focus on the substance and rigor of submissions, providing discipline and method neutral feedback that challenges authors to strengthen their work while maintaining their voice.  Authors receive reviewer feedback and a decision letter from the coeditors within 60-90 days.

It is gratifying to receive so many positive responses indicating that we are meeting these standards.  We are indebted to our editorial board for enabling us to provide our authors the highest possible quality feedback on their work, and to do so in less than 60 days, on average.

Between October 2007 and October 2008 (2006-07 figures in brackets):

·         44 (40) percent of papers were returned to their authors by the Editors without being sent out for blind review;

·         24 (32) percent were rejected after blind editorial review;

·         20 (18) percent were invited to revise and resubmit their work for further consideration after review;

·         12 (12) percent were accepted for publication.

Notable among these figures is the continued high rate at which submissions are returned to authors by the coeditors without being sent out for blind review.  All submissions are carefully screened by the coeditors before being sent out for review.  Because our publication decisions are made after no more than one major revision, a policy we adopted to ensure a prompt review process, the quality and development stage of initial submissions greatly affects their likelihood of being accepted for full review.

Also notable is the continued high rejection rate relative to the rate at which revisions were invited and papers accepted.  Clearly SO!’s Board members are willing to accept only the very best work – so send us yours!

Open Call for Article and Essay Submissions

SO! welcomes article submissions that have a strong interdisciplinary base and reflect a clear understanding of the related strategic and organizational literatures.  Empirical and theoretical articles published in SO! are conducted soundly and rigorously within their genre and discipline.  Preferred submissions identify a compelling strategic organization topic and a strong conceptual framework for tackling it.  We do not accept for review literature reviews or propositional inventories.

In addition to regular refereed articles, we also welcome proposals for SO!APBOX editorial essays.  A soapbox is a platform used by a self-appointed, spontaneous, or informal orator, or, more broadly an outlet for delivering opinions.  These editorial essays are a forum for thought-provoking informed opinion and reflection, forging interdisciplinary bridges and new research directions, debating methodological traditions, and staking out the field of strategic organization.

Submission and review processes for articles and editorial essays are described on the inside-back cover of journal, and in more detail on the coeditors’ journal website at www.rotman.utoronto.ca/~baum/so.html, or at SAGE Journals Online at so.sagepub.com.

Ann Langley joins SO! as Guest Coeditor for 2009

Please welcome Ann Langley (HEC, Montreal) as Guest Coeditor for Volume 7 (2009).  We asked Ann to join SO! as a Guest Coeditor to help with the review of manuscripts that would normally have been assigned to Royston Greenwood, who will be extremely busy with his duties as OMT Program Chair for the 2009 Academy of Management Conference.   Ann be assigned new manuscripts between January and June 2009, and will see these through the review process.   We are excited that Ann has agreed to serve in this capacity; we are sure her efforts will contribute to furthering SO!s reputation for providing a timely, informed and developmental review process of the highest quality – and for accepting only the very best work.

A Soothing Salve

SO! continues to make progress toward its ambition of providing an unparalleled forum reconnecting the fields of strategy and organization theory.  That integration remains core to our aspired identity and contribution to the field.  We have achieved a great deal … but yearn to move on.  How quickly we are able to achieve our goals, however, ultimately depends upon you!  So keep sending us your submissions … and reading and referencing the articles and essay we publish!

Joel A. C. Baum, Royston Greenwood, and P. Devereaux Jennings

Coeditors

 



[1] Because SO! was not covered in the ISI during this period, citation counts do not include references to SO! articles published in SO!  Consequently, the impact factor is underestimated relative to journals covered in the index.

[2] Azar, O.H. and Brock, D.M. (2008). “A Citation-based Ranking of Strategic Management Journals.” Journal of Economics and Management Strategy, 17 (3): 781–802.