Summary of the TAR editors discussion:
1. MD of UIUC has no TAR articles and fewer top publications.
2. MC of UGA has one TAR and fewer top publications.
3. AG of Netherlands has three TAR publications, one of them was retracted.
BC of Utah should be on the list
Summary of the TAR editors discussion:
1. MD of UIUC has no TAR articles and fewer top publications.
2. MC of UGA has one TAR and fewer top publications.
3. AG of Netherlands has three TAR publications, one of them was retracted.BC of Utah should be on the list
Sorry that your paper had to be rejected. BC is a decent researcher with expertise in the corporate governance area.
Summary of the TAR editors discussion:
1. MD of UIUC has no TAR articles and fewer top publications.
2. MC of UGA has one TAR and fewer top publications.
3. AG of Netherlands has three TAR publications, one of them was retracted.BC of Utah should be on the list
Sorry that your paper had to be rejected. BC is a decent researcher with expertise in the corporate governance area.
BC is the most qualified corporate governance expert in accounting. He has 4 top pubs during a 13 year period after PhD graduation, including 2 TARs. He is well deserved to serve two terms. He should become the next senior editor. If you have better records than BC, he will reject your papers unless he wants to build a connection with you.
Summary of the TAR editors discussion:
1. MD of UIUC has no TAR articles and fewer top publications.
2. MC of UGA has one TAR and fewer top publications.
3. AG of Netherlands has three TAR publications, one of them was retracted.BC of Utah should be on the list
Sorry that your paper had to be rejected. BC is a decent researcher with expertise in the corporate governance area.
Please do not bring BC into this mess.
Summary of the TAR editors discussion:
1. MD of UIUC has no TAR articles and fewer top publications.
2. MC of UGA has one TAR and fewer top publications.
3. AG of Netherlands has three TAR publications, one of them was retracted.BC of Utah should be on the list
BC is probably the most qualified editor on the current slate. If not he’s easily into the upper quartile.
Quite honestly, the website is incredibly rude and misinformed. And I hope everyone who reads this drivel knows to ignore everything you read. It is 100% false.
There are about 30 editors. I counted easily 20 with significantly better records, and there were a few I’m not familiar with.
BC is probably the most qualified editor on the current slate. If not he’s easily into the upper quartile.
Quite honestly, the website is incredibly rude and misinformed. And I hope everyone who reads this drivel knows to ignore everything you read. It is 100% false.
There are about 30 editors. I counted easily 20 with significantly better records, and there were a few I’m not familiar with.
BC is probably the most qualified editor on the current slate. If not he’s easily into the upper quartile.
Quite honestly, the website is incredibly rude and misinformed. And I hope everyone who reads this drivel knows to ignore everything you read. It is 100% false.
As a point of clarification, how are you considering “records”? Adjusting for research area, impact, citations etc?
BC is the most qualified corporate governance expert in accounting. He has 4 top pubs during a 13 year period after PhD graduation, including 2 TARs. He is well deserved to serve two terms. He should become the next senior editor. If you have better records than BC, he will reject your papers unless he wants to build a connection with you.
Summary of the TAR editors discussion:
1. MD of UIUC has no TAR articles and fewer top publications.
2. MC of UGA has one TAR and fewer top publications.
3. AG of Netherlands has three TAR publications, one of them was retracted.BC of Utah should be on the list
Sorry that your paper had to be rejected. BC is a decent researcher with expertise in the corporate governance area.
The most sarcastic post of the year!
About 1000 citations (from accounting papers) over 17 years. That’s not really killing it, adjusted for whatever you want.
There are about 30 editors. I counted easily 20 with significantly better records, and there were a few I’m not familiar with.BC is probably the most qualified editor on the current slate. If not he’s easily into the upper quartile.
Quite honestly, the website is incredibly rude and misinformed. And I hope everyone who reads this drivel knows to ignore everything you read. It is 100% false.
As a point of clarification, how are you considering “records”? Adjusting for research area, impact, citations etc?
BC is probably the most qualified editor on the current slate. If not he’s easily into the upper quartile.
Quite honestly, the website is incredibly rude and misinformed. And I hope everyone who reads this drivel knows to ignore everything you read. It is 100% false.
I want to smoke the same stuff you have!!
Haha best post ever. BC is really a jealous and insecure type.
BC is the most qualified corporate governance expert in accounting. He has 4 top pubs during a 13 year period after PhD graduation, including 2 TARs. He is well deserved to serve two terms. He should become the next senior editor. If you have better records than BC, he will reject your papers unless he wants to build a connection with you.
Summary of the TAR editors discussion:
1. MD of UIUC has no TAR articles and fewer top publications.
2. MC of UGA has one TAR and fewer top publications.
3. AG of Netherlands has three TAR publications, one of them was retracted.BC of Utah should be on the list
Sorry that your paper had to be rejected. BC is a decent researcher with expertise in the corporate governance area.
BC is probably the most qualified editor on the current slate. If not he’s easily into the upper quartile.
Quite honestly, the website is incredibly rude and misinformed. And I hope everyone who reads this drivel knows to ignore everything you read. It is 100% false.I want to smoke the same stuff you have!!
This guy is the poster child of the average white American mediocre accounting researcher - sad that this is how this profession looks like nowadays
MC-UGA should not have accepted this job. Its just too big for her. She should be removed asap and every paper she rejected should be reevaluated! Otherwise this stain will hold for a long time.
People like her are the reason many researchers complain. How can she be the judge of someones' work while being inferior? Just one TAR of a decade ago is nothing. The TAR of 2012 is an AOS at max nowadays.
BC is probably the most qualified editor on the current slate. If not he’s easily into the upper quartile.
Quite honestly, the website is incredibly rude and misinformed. And I hope everyone who reads this drivel knows to ignore everything you read. It is 100% false.I want to smoke the same stuff you have!!
This guy is the poster child of the average white American mediocre accounting researcher - sad that this is how this profession looks like nowadays
At least he knows a few things about wine...
RM is happy at PennState. Illinois did not contact or interview RM, and he is not looking to leave.Did not he just moved to PSU?
I heard the same. Big move by Illinois. They needed a big financial hire.
Is it true that RM is leaving PSU to go to Illinois? Reliable source says yes.
Did not he just moved to PSU?I heard the same. Big move by Illinois. They needed a big financial hire.
Is it true that RM is leaving PSU to go to Illinois? Reliable source says yes.
RM is happy at PennState. Illinois did not contact or interview RM, and he is not looking to leave.
But he got a call from the church - he is needed in Urbana Champaign