What is published in our journals cannot change unless we do
European Journal of Information Systems (2009) 18, 189–191. doi:10.1057/ejis.2009.21 What is published in our journals? Complaints I have just come back from a conference where there was a ‘Meet the Editors’ Panel’. At the end of the meeting there was a discussion session, which showed some widespread lack of understanding about the process of getting an author’s paper published. This is in spite of my article four years ago that went into the issue quite thoroughly (Paul, 2005). The reader is recommended to visit this article if it has not been read yet. I have also experienced some fairly robust comments from rejected authors, which give me the impression that talking about getting a paper published would be worthwhile. Hence this editorial. First though, an unhelpful view of publishing is to distinguish editors and their teams from authors. It is as if the former came down from Mars, and as alien life forms were making life difficult for the latter. In reality, we are all part of the same community, from which some of us have been selected, or volunteered, or through some other democratic selection process, have taken on these review roles. So, if we as a community do not like anything about what is published in our subject, then it is up to all of us to do something about it, not just editors. For example: Complaint: it takes too long to get a paper into print, sometimes three or more years. Responses:
Editor's View: an opportunity for editors of IS journals to relate their experiences and offer advice. The Editorial View of Ray J Paul. First in a series
This opinion paper discusses the objectives of this series of Editor's Views and introduces this particular view, the first in the series. After reminding readers of the objectives of this journal, the European Journal of Information Systems, some experiences concerning the range of submissions the Journal receives are presented. Based on these experiences, some advice is offered to help prospective authors improve their chance of being accepted by the Journal. How the advice impacts on the review process is next described to assist prospective authors in determining the suitability and acceptability of a planned submission. The paper ends with planned improvements to the journal, and how authors can help the European Journal of Information Systems continue its successful progress as one of the leading IS journals.
The Inca Occupation of the South Coast of Peru
like the others, however; it forks into several nearly parallel ravines of which the largest are Huayuri, Rio Grande-Palpa, Ingenio (called Collao in ancient times), Nasca proper (the ancient Caxamarca), Taruga, and Poroma. Due to peculiarities of the local topography, the irrigated areas in Ica and the ravines of Nasca are located inland, at the foot of the mountains, rather than at the mouths of the rivers as is more usual in Peruvian coastal valleys. No sharp natural or cultural boundary separates the valley of Chincha from the valleys of Cafiete (ancient Huarco and Runahuana), Asia, and Mala, the next valleys going up the coast to the northwest. At the other end of the area we are considering, however, there is a sharp break; beyond Yauca the Andean foothills reach out to the sea, natural conditions are quite different, and there are important differences in the archaeological picture as well. The historical sources which mention the south coast are not particularly helpful, except in so far as they provide us with a few dates. To begin with, no chronicler gives an explicit account of the political organization of the south coast at the time it came into contact with the Incas. It can, perhaps, be inferred from Cabello Balboa's statements about common policy toward the Inca invaders that there was some sort of political connection between the valleys of Mala, Cafiete, and Chincha, but the connection need have been no more than a temporary military alliance. Cabello makes no mention at all of Pisco. The valleys of Ica, Nasca, and 125