Editor's Notes

• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1002/nml.21273
• Author: Mark A. Hager
• Published date: 01 June 2017
• Date: 01 June 2017

453

N M  L, vol. 27, no. 4, Summer 2017 © 2017 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Published online in Wiley Online Library (wileyonlinelibrary.com) DOI: 10.1002/nml.21273

Journal sponsored by the Jack, Joseph and Morton Mandel School of Applied Social Sciences, Case Western Reserve University.

EDITOR ’ S NOTES

IN ADDITION TO its editorial board, Nonprofi t Management & Leadership also maintains

an advisory board comprised of senior scholars in the fi eld. One long-time member of this

advisory board is Ferenc Farkas, a professor at the University of Pécs, in Hungary. I have been

remiss to not make an announcement in a more recent editorial, but I only recently became

aware of Ferenc ’ s death. Ferenc Farkas died in September of 2016, at the age of 67. His stu-

dent and colleague Dobrai Katalin wrote a nice memorial in the October-November issue of

Inside ISTR . Dobrai wrote and told me that, despite his illness, Ferenc worked until the last

minute of his life.  is is the best testament to his commitment that I can imagine. He will

be missed.

In this issue ’ s editorial, I focus on the diversity of journal outlets for scholars in our field. In

recent years, Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly and Voluntas have increased the num-

ber of articles they publish each year, and Nonprofit Management & Leadership has seen a

pivot in emphasis from practice to academic scholarship under my editorship. These changes

are the result of the increasing number of scholars in our field, most of whom face pressures

to publish in the field ’ s best outlets. Specialized journals in public administration, account-

ing, economics, sociology, political science, and other disciplines offer quality outlets for

scholarship in nonprofit and philanthropic studies. Additionally, a number of niche journals

specifically related to the field have been founded relatively recently, featuring foci on policy,

marketing, NGOs, volunteer administration, law, literature reviews, and specific areas of the

world, among other topics.

When scholars are developing a manuscript or have one in hand, the question of where

to send that manuscript for review is usually met by a strategic consideration of a host of

variables. Scholars at research institutions typically face greater expectations and pressures

to publish in the “best” outlets, meaning the journals that are well-considered by the field.

Scholars in particular fields (e.g., economics, public administration, and business) may face

pressures to publish in their fields’ journals, and bypass the field ’ s multi-disciplinary journals.

Sometimes research topics are a better fit for niche (say, marketing) rather than the field ’ s

more generalist journals. Sometimes scholars recognize that the shortcomings of a particular

project or manuscript will make publication at “better” outlets difficult, so they opt to sub-

mit to a journal where they believe the expectations bar will be lower.

Concerns about the quality of the manuscript are not the only reason why scholars some-

times shoot low. Scholars at some smaller or non-research-oriented institutions face less

expectation for research, or have little to no regard for the quality or reputation of the outlet.

So long as scholars at those institutions can point to published work on their vita, contracts

are renewed. However, scholars at research institutions sometimes shoot low due to pressures

to perform. Junior faculty are asked to publish extensively and rapidly. These pressures some-

times translate into scholars submitting half-baked work to moderate- to lower-tier outlets

just so they can sleep at night.