Agree everything in
advance and capture in a pre-nuptial agreement
Regardless of whether
you are working with close friends or people you hardly know, find the time and
bravado to broach the difficult issues in advance.
The most socially neutral thing to suggest is
that you and your co-authors are listed on the masthead alphabetically. This
however, is more attractive if you’re an Atkins than a Zabinsky. Be wary of
anyone bearing the double-barrelled surname Aardvark-Zabinsky; they’ve probably
had some difficult co-authoring experiences and arrived in your life via the
branch of local government that deals with changing your name by
deed-poll. However, it isn’t just about author
order. Think about who owns the data, what happens if you want to write a
follow up paper without the original team (perhaps because you’ve vowed never
to work with them again), who is the “returning officer” for the paper in terms
of research assessment exercises, etc. Like any relationship, these things
might seem unnecessary and unlikely in the first flush of a new writing
partnership. Ask some senior colleagues and you’ll find that most experienced
academics could shame the late Zsa Zsa Gabor with their trail of broken
authoring relationships.
Have a clear division
of labour
Agree up front who
will do what in the co-authoring team such that everyone is aware that they
have something substantive to do.
The transition from initial idea to published
artefact usually involves a significant amount of time and effort pursuing a
variety of tasks. These range from
scanning the literature to gathering data and from negotiating with editors to
making the diagrams look presentable.
For your co-authoring experience to feel collaborative it helps that
these tasks are identified and shared amongst the members of your authoring
team. As a basic premise, authoring
traditionally means the writing of words. In academia authoring might not
involve actual words but could involve gathering data, coding, analysing,
developing conceptual models, reviewing, editing or any number of other things.
Make a list. Be clear on who is doing which bits. If you’ve had difficult experiences
in earlier co-authoring teams you might feel the need for a Gantt chart or even
some pledges.
Know how your
co-authors work
Discuss the process
that your new co-authors go through as they craft a publishable artefact. That
way you’ll know what to expect.
How people actually write is important. We are
not referring to questionable use punctuation or appalling grammar but rather
to the actual creative process of writing. Some co-authors may want regular
contact and the opportunity for informal chats over endless cups of tea,
huddled round a computer screen or staring at a whiteboard. For them, these might be the vital social
interactions which underpin the creative process. For others it might simply
seem a waste of time. Neither view is right but knowing whether to schedule
another chat or wait until someone shares a draft of something worth sharing is
important. It is easy to see how an irretrievable breakdown can occur if you
have very different creative processes and haven’t taken the time to set
expectations. Attitude to deadlines is another area of friction. Are you by
nature an observer of deadlines or do you regard them as the opening salvo in a
negotiating process where only a fool would fold that easily? Again, it is
important to know both your own norms and those of your co-authors especially
if you want to write together again.
Develop the hide of a
Rhinoceros
Opportunities for
academics to take offence are legion. If
you want a co-authoring relationship to work you’re going to have to get over
the idea that all criticism is personal.
Some of us craft every line and syllable with
the care of a poet. If you are the type of author who cares deeply and
profoundly over every carefully crafted turn of phrase there is a very real
chance that you will find co-authoring relationships traumatic. Especially
where you are working with new people.
Nevertheless, it is important to hear feedback when it is offered. Don’t
fret over your much loved alliteration or pithy tone. Remember that there should
be some difference from the tone of your solo authored work; that is the
intention after all. And remember that your co-authors are probably playing the
field. Monogamy in co-authoring
relationships is not unheard of, but rampant polygamy is much more the
norm. Some relationships turn out to be
for life. Some will start for a reason then only last a season. Try to learn how to improve your own writing
and carry those lessons forward regardless.
Pull your weight
If you are pulling
your own weight in your shared endeavours then you will be better able to
chastise your co-authors should the need arise.
There should be no such thing as a free
publication. The number of co-authors varies by field meaning that there are no
hard and fast rules. Papers with over
1000 authors occur in the sciences and even one case with 5000 authors. If you
find yourself in one of those co-authoring teams you really only need one or
two words each, but proof reading by committee might be a challenge. These
extremes tend to be the exception rather than the norm. In the social sciences singled authored
papers remain commonplace, with two to five being seen as entirely normal. Even with solo authoring there can be trust
issues and that escalates in a non-linear way the more authors you add. If you’ve already divided up the tasks
involved it helps but doesn’t completely mitigate the propensity to feel like
you’re doing more than your fair share. Be willing to have awkward
conversations but only if you are completely confident that you’ve done all the
things you promised to do.
Remember that editing
is a form of writing
Writing the first draft
and editing the final one are both forms of writing. Recognise that editing is
a critical skill which more than justifies the status of co-author if done
well.
Some authors are good at first drafts. Others
are better at polishing the final draft. In between are those whose gift is a
form of structural engineering that sees whole chunks of text move around as
arguments take shape and a workable narrative arc is refined. Be clear where
and when you are adding value to the paper. It is questionable whether spotting
the occasional typo or stray apostrophe counts as co-authoring. If your name is
listed with the authors rather than in the acknowledgements you should be able
to point to the specific things that you’ve added (or deleted). Early discussions
about any “thou shalt not delete” sections, ideas or quotes obviously helps
diffuse tension in the editing process.
That said, a healthy co-authoring team has the emotional bandwidth to
handle reducing an entire section to a few punchy sentences even if the blame
is laid squarely with the reviewers for appearances sake. Those few remaining words might be the hook
on which the entire paper hangs.
Co-authoring is therefore as much about ideas as words.
Remember your status
All co-authors are
equal, but some are more equal than others. Knowing where you are in the
hierarchy can help smooth the social process.
Sometimes it is hard to escape the Orwellian
sense in which co-authoring hierarchies subtly reassert themselves. On the surface, you are part of the same team
pulling in the same direction but there is more than likely some implicit
hierarchy. There may be an author in
chief who simply shouts some encouragement periodically in person or by Skype.
There are probably some worker bees who feel that they are doing most of the
heavy lifting. Each may regard the other as ballast; but in principle at least,
each could be adding something valuable.
If you are a PhD student or an early career researcher you might feel
slightly peeved by those you consider to be acting as frictional drag. In those
circumstances, the question you should be asking is would the paper survive
without others and the answer is often no.
If you want to learn the craft of publishing, working with a more
experienced author makes sense. You may simply have to accept that you learn
valuable authoring lessons (and some life lessons) in any asymmetrical writing
relationship. Who knows, if it works you
might one day be seen as the ballast by the next generation of researchers.
Exploit your networks
Who to work with?
Think about the people you know, colleagues, supervisors, examiners are a very
good place to start, who would like to work with?
Senior academics get asked to co-author a lot
and not always because of their magnetic personality and fantastic mentoring
skills. At the end of every seminar or
conference paper they are surrounded by a small huddle of people offering
chances to collaborate on something which draws directly on their big ideas.
Consequently such established stars tend to have a well-honed routine for
avoiding such career development opportunities.
Think about it from their perspective. They probably have a bulging
pipeline of new projects, some established co-authoring relationships of their
own, some PhD students to whom they feel a moral obligation. What is it about
your proposed collaboration that would deliver something of value to them?
There could be access to a new and interesting data set or the chance to learn
about a new theoretical domain or context.
What can you bring to the table beyond the evident need to get yourself
published? A good starting point is to remember that co-authoring is not just
about the writing, ideally find people that you like as human beings and with
whom you can get on well. Charm, enthusiasm and the low-maintenance sense in
which you look to be both polite and competent helps a great deal.
(re)evaluate the
experience
Take the time to
assess the pros and cons of each co-authoring arrangement and act on the
conclusions.
There are a number of criteria that you can use
to evaluate a co-authoring experience. Is it helping you publish to a standard
that you could not yet attain alone? If the answer is yes then you are probably
still learning things and developing as an author. If publications aren’t
appearing at all, at the rate you hoped or in the right standard of outlet then
maybe it isn’t working. Are you enjoying it? Of course, it could be hell but
rewarding; equally, it could be fun but frustrating. Ideally you’re looking to
combine something which is socially rewarding, developmental and delivering
better results than you could achieve as a solo author. Why bother if you don’t
enjoy at least some aspects of the co-authoring relationship? Are you being
honest? If you are having offline discussions about who is claiming what from
the paper (e.g. who claims the paper for REF or claims to have taken the lead
for the purposes of a promotion case, etc.). If so this is usually an indicator
that all is not well. And just because things used to work well is no guarantee
that they will continue to do so indefinitely. Evaluating what you’re getting
out of it in the here and now is important. Co-authoring, just like other forms
of relationship, takes on-going maintenance.
Break up gracefully
Not all co-authoring
relationships last so, if you have decided to go your separate ways, try to
consciously uncouple in a way which doesn’t do lasting damage.
Some high-profile co-authors are also married to
each other. You can imagine that this further exacerbates the potential for an acrimonious
break up when things go wrong. Even if you’re not married there remains a need
to find a way of exiting gracefully as you never know when your paths will
cross again. Well intentioned co-authoring teams can head inexorably toward an
irretrievable breakdown for any or all of the same reasons as marriages:
psychological immaturity; incompatibility; relationship entered into under
false pretences; or even, nonconsummation – i.e. that the paper never did get
written. Whatever the reason, a good
prenuptial agreement helps (see point 1 above). In the absence of such an
agreement you’ll need to negotiate the distribution of your goods and chattels
as you make clear that you want out.
This can be problematic and it might help to rope in a.n.other as an
honest broker. The longer and more successful
the co-authoring relationship has been, the harder it will be to uncouple.
Where you are agreeing not to go beyond a first publication the process can be
easier. Your joint papers will, however, loiter on your CV as a permanent
reminder of the rich collaboration you once had/the biggest mistake you ever
made (delete as appropriate).
This advice also appeared in the Times Higher Education Supplement.