A reader writes in:
I'm looking for some advice about how to juggle different projects. I put together a draft, sent it to a few folks for comment, and I received back one set of thorough comments already. I'm wondering: Is it better to stick with one paper all the way through til it's ready to be submitted somewhere? –the idea being I have the material in my head so it's good to work on it while I have it all well-rehearsed. Or is it better to sit on some of those comments and work up a different paper draft altogether so that when I do come back to the first project, I'll be looking at the comments and my own work with fresher eyes? Bear in mind, (1) I have zero pubs and (2) I'm not talking about drafts that are submission ready nor am I talking about drafts that have been commented on by journal reviewers. Maybe I'm asking a broader question related to a fruitful publishing program: is it better to complete one thing at a time start to finish or to have several papers going at any given time?
These are really great questions. Although everyone works differently, my sense is that it may be a mistake to focus on just one project at a time. For better or worse, academia has become progressively more competitive. Job-candidates seem to have more publications than ever before, and so to be competitive on the market (and then, for tenure) one must publish quite a bit. And unfortunately, focusing on just one project at a time doesn't seem to me to be all that conducive to this–as to publish a lot, one has to get a lot out for review, and to get a lot out for review, one has to (I think) be drafting and revising multiple projects at any given time. Maybe this is wrong, and if so, I'd be curious to hear from readers who work on just one project at a time and are successful that way. In any case, I don't work that way. Allow me to briefly explain how I work (and why), and then open things up for comments.
The OP's query seems to presuppose that they should either choose to draft up something new or revise the paper the already-drafted paper they received comments on. My own strategy is to do both kinds of thing simultaneously–that is, I am always drafting up new papers and revising old ones concurrently. Here, broadly speaking, is how I work. On days that I have plenty of time for research, I'll spend several hours first thing in the morning drafting new work (maybe 3-5 pages or whatever). Then, after a break (e.g. lunch, etc.), I'll spend a few hours revising old work. This way of working in turn leads me to have something like a half-dozen working manuscripts at any given time, as every time I finish a new draft (during my morning writing time), I'll put that paper in my 'papers to revise' slot and begin working on a new paper draft in the mornings. For example, right now, I have a paper I started drafting last week (which I'm going to continue drafting as soon as I finish this post!), as well as four other completed drafts to work on revising. To be clear, I don't revise each of the four papers every afternoon, or anything like that. Rather, if I have time in the afternoon, I'll choose which one to work on–i.e. whichever one I currently feel the most motivated and best equipped to revise. Then, slowly but surely, the papers in my 'revise' pile will get in what I judge to be in good enough shape to send out to a journal–and so when I finally send them off, I'll remove them from the revise pile until I hear back from the journal.
I don't suppose that my strategy will work for everyone, as again, everyone works differently. But regardless, my sense is that juggling multiple projects simultaneously is an important skill to learn in order to publish effectively, so if other readers have different strategies that work well, I'd love to hear about them in the comments section!
Leave a Reply