Ann Hackert (Idaho State University), Karen Foust (Tulane University), Jessica A. Magaldi (Pace University)
Reviewing the Review Process: An Author and Editor Perspective
The authors interviewed a group of editors and authors during November 2019. Participants were interviewed for 20 to 45 minutes and were asked a series of questions related to their role. The interview instrument in Appendix A shows the questions editors were asked, while Appendix B is the set of questions for authors. The publications covered by the author and editor sample are the three refereed journals published by the Society for Case Research (SCR). These journals include the Journal of Critical Incidents (JCI), the Business Case Journal (BCJ), and the Journal of Case Studies (JCS). The focus of each journal differs. JCI limits authors to a three-page decision or descriptive case scenario called a critical incident that includes references tables and text. BCJ publishes longer cases. JCS publishes longer cases that are typically workshopped during the summer meeting for SCR. The purpose of this study is to assess the experiences with the peer review process of the authors who published in any of these three journals. In addition, editors were interviewed who were responsible for each of the journals either currently or in the past. The results of the interviews indicated common themes that suggest both strengths of the process and areas where the process and participation could be improved. The paper begins with a brief literature review followed by a section on methodology. The results of the qualitative research are summarized and discussed in the results section. The final section suggests possible common themes that could be addressed by improving the process. For the purposes of this paper, the authors use of the term case includes critical incidents, unless otherwise indicated.