 |
 |
I agree with much that Henrik, Steve L., and Steve T. have said here. I've been talking with Ralph Bathurst about this for awhile, and it seems like now is the time to get the journal going again, along with an aacorn board (a minimal one I suppose :-)), and the conference. Tying the journal to the conference and/or membership seems to be the way most mgmt. groups are handling things these days: Academy of Mgmt., EGOS, SCOS. Seems to work well. RE Henrik’s idea of doing something, I completely agree. We could have art pieces as part of each issue, focused on some mgmt. theme or question. Could be pictures, but also with links to multimedia pages. If we had some good works, say 2 or 3 with thoughtful commentary alongside the scholarly content, the journal might have wider appeal. Having co-organized the summit/conference Henrik mentioned, it’s clear to me that these efforts need close attention...in this particular case we never got the necessary buy-in to get the book published; hence the balloons. Still, there was some very cool stuff that was developed—clever insights into mgmt. and economics, replete with a cartoon section. Another practice-based section could be for art-at-work projects...some artistic interventions around particular mgmt. problems. I’ve been doing this with my MBA Art of Mgmt. class and it’s turned out extremely well. I teach them art thinking and they have to apply it to their various mgmt. issues and create managerial art projects. Some of the projects are very good indeed and are having many direct and indirect workplace effects. So having some things like this, perhaps where we get a subgroup of aacorners to work on a mgmt. problem and then do an attractive writeup, could also extend the circulation. So the market becomes academics, managers, and art communities. And with this, we might eventually get some donors! In terms of subject areas, there are many many areas, ones that could constitute themed sections. All the mgmt. functions are just waiting for art thinking to hit their doors--strategy, HR, ops, etc. And there are hosts of mgmt. issues, ranging from greed to green, that could nicely become the subject of artistic gazes and interventions. Going back to Henrik’s idea of doing something together, face to face, I think having a partial writing section at the conference could be hugely fun and useful. I wouldn’t want that to be the only or even main way that journal content is made, but as a bi-annual or annual event that turns into an issue, it could be super. Finally, I’m a big advocate of rigour and quality. Aesthesis had a pretty look, and the design was certainly rigorous and high quality, but the content was often too vague and lacking good data/theory. I know because I wanted our library to subscribe. It had to go through a vetting process, and the journal was soundly rejected. We ended up subscribing because I paid for the thing myself! Okay, these are my ramblings for now. Thanks Steve, Steve, and Henrik. D -----Original Message----- From: Aesthetics, Creativity, and Organisations Research Network [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Schrat Sent: Thursday, June 24, 2010 8:56 AM To: [log in to unmask] Subject: AW: A Journal I feel terrible for not having said anything the last few months...just too much work. Tunnel. But here is a thought on this subject: To me a comibination of the Doing-something-together on the conference and the Journal could be interesting. I had to think of a small art-and-organization summit in I think it was 2004 in Denmark. We actually DID something together as it was suggested the last days, what would be otherwise Streams where organized like publishing groups, responsible for a part of the publication to be, and the overall publication would be discussed in plenum or between embessadors of the groups. We ended up with the plan for a complicated threeangular structure book.. well, it became at the end a little black balloon with text printed on it (thanks to Kent Hanson, who pushed it). I guess, thats not the plan here, to publish balloons, but I like the general direction, which also talks about its function: Would it be the plan, to establish another rated journal? I would rather see it as a communication platform, fanzine and documentation, indeed linked up with AMO and / or AACORN, ideally both. A group building tool emanting our spirit. AISTHESIS got the mixture quite right, but in terms of brand positioning it somehow overstated it. We are roughly 1 quarter practitioneers, 1 quarter arty people and 1 half academics, right? Hm. This mixture of interests never adds really up to something marketable. *grin* thats why we are all here, right? To build up something with interesting content which has appeal, which is informative but sexy, we dont need to be full colour. I would play the underdog - cart to build up cult. I like polls by the way. To circulate a simple questionaire about pricing and content, adds, size etc. on some point could be interesting, and could provide the basis for the first issue. Best Henrik -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- Von: Aesthetics, Creativity, and Organisations Research Network [mailto:[log in to unmask]]Im Auftrag von [log in to unmask] Gesendet: Donnerstag, 24. Juni 2010 09:11 An: [log in to unmask] Betreff: Re: A Journal One thing to consider is what is the market for this journal likely to be? How big is it, and how are we going to reach it? I know we all loved it, but that love actually didn't translate into many subscriptions for Aesthesis - or at least, not enough, even with careful management of costs and suppliers etc. Would everyone in AACORN be prepared to pay a subscription a receive the journal as part of it? Include the cost of a year's subscription to the journal in the AoMO conference fee? That's how SCOS developed their journal Culture and Organization and it is still partly supported that way, although it is now 2* rated, is in process of getting ISI recognition and is included in the publisher's electronic packages too. But that's how it built. It was the first journal in our field to feature black and white photos as a norm. And it struggled. The reason that most publishers won't go to full colour, full design is that it is too expensive for the market that scholarly journals serve (mainly libraries). This includes the fact that the content is provided by the authors for free - some even pay to get it reviewed. These days academic journals rely on a combination of hard copy sales to libraries (dwindling) and a few individuals, and being packaged in a group of online subscriptions (increasing). Getting an academic library to pick up a new subscription is hard unless the journal is a) used on courses as recommended reading b) in demand by academics for research. The latter is always parlous unless you can c) get onto the ISI list and obtain an impact factor d) get onto one of the recognised international ranking lists. This tends to have an effect on the content of these journals, which are at best evolutionary rather than revolutionary (and sometimes devolutionary). So you need either a fat grant, commercial or private sponsorship, or advertising. The likelihood of the first is remote (in the UK at least) given this week's funding cuts, and would in any case be a limited time measure to get things moving rather than longer term. The second is not impossible but needs careful targeting, a very well thought through pitch, and some clear benefit for the sponsor (or a real philanthropist with a quirky passion that matches yours). The latter is possible, but is very much co-evolutionary with the target market. So although Steve's questions are all very important, I think the completion backward principle applies - ie question 6. sets the tone for all the others.(6,4,1,5,2,3) Best Steve On Jun 24 2010, Taylor, Steven S. wrote: > It's been great to hear all of the support for continuing the AMO > conference and I'm excited that Steve Linstead has stepped up and taken > on running a 2012 conference in Bristol. This gives us more time and > space to talk and think about how to create an organization that will > ensure that the conferences keep happening. > > The other great contribution from Ian King (and others) that I think > needs to be continued in some fashion was the creation of the journal > Aesthesis: International Journal of Art and Aesthetics in Management and > Organizational Life. I've talked to a few folks and started thinking > about how to fill the void left by the demise of Aesthesis. I'd like to > gather some more information/ideas from the AACORN community about your > desires for a journal. So here's a few questions I'd love to hear some > discussion around: > > 1. What should the journal include (academic articles, practitioner > pieces, art, other)? 2. What should the journal be called? 3. Who would > you like to see in editorial positions (for the journal overall, and/or > sections of the journal)? 4. How important was the look of Aesthesis (it > was a full color, fully designed look, but that's a huge problem for most > publishers)? 5. Who should publish the journal (where's the best fit, and > if you know people at a publisher who you think would be a good choice > are you willing to help in the process)? 6. What else should we be > thinking about in terms of this journal? > >Please feel free to reply to the list or to just me as you prefer. > >Thanks, > >Steve Taylor > > >Steven S. Taylor, PhD >Associate Professor >Worcester Polytechnic Institute >Department of Management >100 Institute Rd >Worcester, MA 01609 >USA >+1 508-831-5557 >[log in to unmask] >