Sovereign Authority or Distributed Influence? Exploring How Journal Editors Manage the Publication Process
两位前主编回顾编辑通信，分析主编如何平衡作者、审稿人和副主编的利益，发现编辑影响是流动且分散的，而非传统认为的主权权威。
In the context of rich debate concerning the publication process, this paper contributes to understandings regarding the role of journal editor. From our perspectives as former co-editors in chief of a leading management journal, we question: “How do journal editors in chief balance the interests of authors, reviewers and associate editors, bearing in mind journal policy?” Conducting a retrospective analysis of our editorial correspondence, we observe how we managed complex relationships among and between authors, reviewers, and associate editors—while seeking to respect journal policy. Drawing upon the ideas of philosopher Michel Foucault to illuminate our experience, we find that editor-in-chief perspectives are wider and more contextual than those of authors, reviewers, and associate editors (whose focus is on individual papers). We suggest that all parties are bound up in the histories and rituals of the peer review process. Further, we identify how, while many accounts attribute to editors a position of effectively sovereign authority, editorial influence is fluid and more distributed than might have been anticipated. Thus, making policy changes can prove challenging and may have unintended consequences regarding governance. We argue that achieving fair and consistent editorship can be enhanced only through better understandings of the editorial process.