Published: A Grounded Theory of Successful Publication for Midcareer Scholars

Universities have experienced unprecedented growth in higher education since the early 20th century (Gappa, Austin, & Trice 2007). Industry pressure to meet higher ranking drives universities to seek more research productivity (Bland, Center, Finstad, Risbey, & Staples, 2005). Research productivity serves as a powerful recruitment for students, funding and faculty (Hazelkorn, 2011; Ivancheva & Gourova 2011). Attracting high ranking, research active scholars is largely based in maintaining higher university ranking (Bland, et al., 2005; Levin, 2006; Mohrman, 2008). As the global market for higher education expands, the significance of ranking and reputation for universities has increased pressure on universities and wields social power (Amsler & Bolsmann, 2012; Portnoi, Bagley, & Rust, 2010). Midcareer scholars constitute the largest component of the academic workforce (Baldwin, DeZure, Shaw, & Moretto, 2008). Traditionally viewed as the career point following tenure and before retirement, the midcareer of a scholar has been recognized by some as a time of productivity, leadership, service and career advancement within their universities and disciplines of study (Baldwin et al., 2008). Midcareer faculty face increasing pressure to publish in peer-reviewed publications in order to meet growing institutional requirements and remain professionally competitive as the numbers of faculty in higher education has risen. The result, as Schuster and Finkelstein (2006) described is that, "Not only are more faculty publishing, but more faculty are publishing more" (p. 103). It has been well established that faculty face multiple challenges to successful peer-reviewed publication, including lack of time (Illing, 2004; Knowles, Cole & Sumison, 2000; Skolnik, 2000; Toews & Yazedjian, 2007; Vannini, 2005), family obligations (Seyed, Al-Haji Umar, & Al-Haji, 2004), confusion regarding publication rating systems (Lee, 2014), lack of institutional resources or support (Rosser, 2005; Seyed et al., 2004), and gender (Schneider, 1998; Stack, 2004; Skolnik, 2000). General concerns regarding management of teaching, service, research and personal life (Sorcinelli, 2007) are well understood. What has yet to be examined, however, is how midcareer scholars successfully manage these challenges. To date, there are no studies, which inquire as to the nature of successful peer-reviewed publication for midcareer scholars. As the first inquiry into the nature of successful peer-reviewed publication, this grounded theory study describes and explains the processes of problem solving, revealing theoretical conceptualization regarding professional advancement through scholarship in peer-reviewed publication. Statement of Problem The problem to be addressed in this grounded theory study was the lack of knowledge regarding successful peer-reviewed publication for midcareer scholars. Literature regarding publishing in peer reviewed publications has demonstrated the challenges of professional advancement through scholarship, yet has yet to understand how some faculty manage these challenges successfully. The majority of literature has focused on midcareer faculty as tenured faculty, leaving a gap in the knowledge regarding publication and midcareer scholars outside of tenured track positions in traditional institutions. Study Objective The objective of this grounded theory study was to discover components of successful peer review publication for midcareer scholars thereby revealing the processes involved with addressing challenges and accomplishing scholarly advancement. Study Rationale The rationale for this grounded theory study was rooted the researchers' philosophical affinity with pragmatism and the assumption that all phenomena are known through multiple realities (Addams, 1916/2001; Dewey, 1929/1960; Seigfried, 2002). The goal for this pragmatically based research was not a resultant Truth; it was the possibility of action generated by the purposing of past experiences as yet another ontological consideration. …