Hello OMTers,

   As we all know, co-author relationships are an important part of academic life. While they can be both enriching and fun, they can also be incredibly frustrating and challenging. We decided to probe this topic a bit further by asking a longtime academic duo - Bob Hinings and Royston Greenwood - about their experiences working together. 

Bob Hinings is a Professor Emeritus at the University of Alberta and received an honorary degree from the Université de Montréal. Royston Greenwood is the Telus Professor of Strategic Management at the University of Alberta & Visiting Professor at the University of Oxford.

1.       What do you consider to be the advantages of co-authoring (versus working on a solo-authored paper)?

BOB: There are a number of things.  First, one’s ideas are tested against someone else so the outcome is usually a much better product.  My experience, in particular, has been that the give and take of discussion and argument can be heated and strong but if there is an acknowledgement that the purpose is to get to a better outcome then the heat is well worth it in bringing more light. Second, I find a personal joy or satisfaction in working with Royston. I think it is part of my personality that other people are interesting and usually have better ideas than I do so I can build on their contributions and get great satisfaction from the process, even though at times it can be challenging. Royston is always full of ideas and it is a challenge to keep up with him.

ROYSTON: The biggest advantage is that it’s more fun. Bob supports a rubbishy soccer team in England (Notts Forrest), and I enjoyed telling him so. It’s been a bit harder in recent years because my team has not exactly covered itself in glory – but still…Similarly, he has this interest in toy trains (I think he calls them ‘model’ trains) – I ask you?! 

In my case, Bob Hinings was an established scholar when we first met (that’s my way of saying that he is an old man) and thus had considerable experience of how to conduct interesting work, craft papers, and so on. In other words, he guided my development. That is really important when you are first starting out.

Another advantage is that we tended to infect each other with enthusiasm. We did tons of field work together and would get excited about stuff that would come out of interviews etc. We spent much time on British Rail and I can remember how ideas for papers would flow – most of which never saw the light of day, but there was an excitement…(Maybe it was a reaction to the lousy BR coffee)

I like to think that we brought – and still bring - slightly different and yet complementary skills to the table. Bob was a sociologist, whereas I was trained as a political scientist. And Bob is actually quite skilled at quant stuff whereas for me the only interesting numbers are usually at the bottom of the page. Having said that, I’m not sure how important it is to have complementary skills – working together is simply more fun.

Please help the OMT division create a GREAT program in Boston!

Please volunteer to review for the OMT division and provide up to three high-quality reviews for fellow members. PLEASE NOTE THAT EVEN IF YOU HAVE REVIEWED IN THE PAST,YOU STILL NEED TO SIGN UP AGAIN FOR THE 2012 MEETING.

To sign up, please visit http://review.aomonline.org/ and click the 'Sign Up Now' button. You will have to create a user account and choose your areas of expertise (i.e. keywords) for the divisions or interest groups for which you want to review. The sign up process should not take more than 10 minutes.

And, don't forget...submit YOUR best work to the OMT division! You can even self-nominate for our prestigious awards:

1) Best Paper Award for the paper which offers the most significant contributions to OMT in the refereed scholarly program paper (may be co-authored; may be empirical or conceptual). OMT gratefully acknowledges the sponsorship of SAGE Publications;

2) Lou Pondy Best Dissertation Paper for the best paper based on a dissertation in the refereed scholarly program (the paper cannot be co-authored and must be clearly identified as dissertation-based at the time of submission). If you wish to be considered for the Pondy, please be sure to mark the box identifying your submission as a student submission when uploading your paper to the AOM website;

3) Best International Paper in the refereed scholarly program regarding themes and content of interest internationally;

4) Best Symposium Award for a symposium submitted to the annual meeting that stimulates, integrates or extends discussions about OMT;

The winning papers for all awards will be selected by a panel of distinguished OMT scholars.

Thanks in advance for volunteering, and thanks for making the OMT program great!