I was recently asked if I consider research & publication the same thing?
I replied no! I view them as discrete activities.
Research is the process of knowledge discovery, it is iterative, fraught with risk, & while the process can be structured, its outcomes are uncertain.
Research lets you answer questions that you find interesting- regardless of what others may or may not think is important.
Publication is the process of communicating the knowledge you discovered, it is iterative, fraught with risk, & while submission can be structured, its outcomes are uncertain.
Publication is how you report answers to questions that you find interesting - but requires you to consider what reviewers & potential readers think is important.
The discovery-communication & internal-external control tension make research & publication quite different parts of the scientific process.
As a result, they require different competencies to be successful, even though, they also require some similar skill sets.
What is similar?
First, the creativity.
I only know one world-class scholar who completely lacks creativity.
Every other great scholar I know is creative & often very funny - in a Sheldon kind of way.
Second, the process.
Every great scholar has a process they use - even though research is more like experimental jazz & publication is more like a symphony.
They both rely on a rhythm that lends structure to the tune.
Third, the management.
Great researchers & publishers know how to manage their time & their team. While it may not be as formal as the PMBOK, there is a rhyme & reason to what they do.
What is different?
First, the uncertainty.
Research is much higher on uncertainty than publication.
Most research does not lead to publication - not until one has gone through multiple rounds of data collection & analysis - even then, it can fail.
Publication has uncertainty - but - once a manuscript is written, it will likely find a home - if you are persistent.
Second, the unexpected.
Research is probing questions that often lead to unexpected findings. This is what makes it fun.
Publication is narrating a known outcome. While the review process can lead to unexpected outcomes, storytelling is the fun.
Third, the skill set.
Research requires competencies - around research design, analysis, grant writing & more.
Publication requires competencies - around writing, responding to criticism, storytelling & more.
To me, even though people outside academe may not see it, the difference is stark - yet - the skill sets are equally important.
A final thought.
Good teams have people with both competencies - it is important to not only discover knowledge but also to communicate it to the world.
I love running studies, but, as academics, we fail in our obligations to society, if we never have a story worth sharing.
\
Comments