I hope all of you had a chance to read the Innovations Issue edited by Lora Harding and Joe Alexander from Belmont University. Lora and Joe put in long hours developing the issue and they did an outstanding job. I hope you will take a moment to review the issue and try out an innovation. I have learned– why invent the wheel when you can adapt and use the amazing work of fellow marketing colleagues.
The Editorial Review Board has been very active providing key input on changes and reviewing submissions these last few months. One important change that occurred is the revision time for articles was shortened to six (6) weeks for major revisions and four (4) weeks for minor revisions or conditional acceptance. These changes will help papers flow through the review process faster, benefitting both the author(s) and the reviewers. I am still soliciting ideas for a special issue and please feel free to send me suggestions; several interesting ideas have been presented and we will be discussing them at the annual Society for Marketing Advances Meeting this November in New Orleans.
This fall marks 20 years as a marketing academic for me. I am not sure where the time has gone, but this milestone has made me reflect on the past 20 years. When I first stepped in a classroom high-tech was having an overhead projector and a chalkboard, while my latest classroom had projection capabilities, collaboration capabilities, and a whiteboard and that is just the physical classroom. Online the applications are virtually endless. Yet as the saying by Jean-Baptiste Alphonse Karr, “The more things change, the more they remain the same.” the necessity to publish and teach well has not changed. This issue is comprised of five articles that address new and continuing concerns to the marketing education profession.
Stephen Baglione peers into student’s perceptions of what constitutes teaching excellence. The study uses conjoint analysis; eight calibration profiles were used to estimate the model. The findings indicate no one trait is responsible for making a student rate a professor excellent – rather it is a combination of traits.
The second article is by Deidre Popovich and Erika Brooks-Hurst explores the perceived effectiveness of service learning projects. As service learning gains momentum in many universities and departments, it becomes important to quantify the benefits. The author develops a Marketing Research Service Learning Scale.
Zahay, Altounian, Pollitte, and James explore what constitutes digital marketing course content, identifying a core set of knowledge and skills that are needed in this third article. Survey respondents were primarily based in the United States with consensus on what should be taught, but acknowledging the need for additional funding and support.
In the fourth article by Dae-Hee Kim investigates the use of third-party online certifications and the effect on learning. The unique twist to this research is the addition of student learning styles. The good news is that students overall are positive about the addition and value of certification programs. The thought provoking news was there were different perceptions based on learning style.
Lastly, Chapman and Ellinger consider the topic of scholar productivity. The authors use a sample of over 1,000 marketing scholars and review their career to date productivity to create benchmarks that can be used to assess scholarly output. The authors look at productivity across ranks and research one and research two institutions.
In closing I would like to thank everyone, who submitted a paper, all my reviewers and the Editorial Review Board for your efforts; you are truly “my ears of the hippo”. While working in a Kenyan private enterprise, I was introduced to this colloquialism, meaning there is so much more we don’t see as it is underwater. This issue represents a very small portion of the work required to develop it and to all who contributed to this issue’s publication – Asante Sana (Thank You!).