Academic publishing in marketing: best and worst practices

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of this paper is to offer observations regarding best and weak practices with respect to academic publishing in marketing.

Design/methodology/approach

The approach takes the form of personal reflections based on the experience of the author as an editor of the Journal of Marketing and Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science.

Findings

Interesting and novel work is most likely to be published in academic journals even when such work has methodological flaws. Research that is methodologically correct but of limited contribution is less likely to be published. Venue‐driven research, replications, most extensions of prior research and data fitting exercises are unlikely to be published in the “better” marketing journals.

Practical implications

The paper offers practical advice about how to publish in the better marketing journals and how an author should manage the publication process.

Originality/value

The paper offers observations regarding best and weak practices with respect to academic publishing in marketing. It is a practical guide to the academic publication process in marketing. It will be of use to any aspiring scholar in marketing.

Citation

Stewart, D.W. (2008), "Academic publishing in marketing: best and worst practices", European Business Review, Vol. 20 No. 5, pp. 421-434. https://doi.org/10.1108/09555340810897943