Writing
* Academy ol Management Review
2012. Vol. 37. No. 4. 490-501. hltp*dx.doi.org/10.M65/amr.2012.0165
EDITOR'S COMMENTS: REFLECTIONS ON THE CRAFT OF CLEAR WRITING
Writing is hard work. A clear sentence is no accident. Very few sentences come out right the first time, or even the third time. Remember this in moments of despair. If you find that writing is hard, it's because it is hard (Zinsser, 2006: 9). Most of us struggle with our writing. We thrash and hack our way through paragraphs, writing and editing and rewriting until we think we've made some progress on that God-forsaken manuscript. The next morning we turn on the computer, read the file, and realize that our work of art is a muddled mess. We curse, hit the delete key, and start again. It can be a frustrating process, particularly for theory papers, which are all about the writing. But we hang in there. We finish the manuscript and submit it to AMR. We wait. We wait some more. We get the reviews. The rejection stings, but the reviewer's comments are worse: "I'm puzzled as to what exactly you are trying to accomplish here." "The first twenty-three pages are an endless literature review." "I had to read several pages into the manuscript to get a hint about what you are trying to achieve." "What exactly is this paper about? After reading it twice, I'm still not sure."^ We open the freezer and reach for the HäagenDazs. We think, "What is wrong with these reviewers? Why couldn't they understand the point of my manuscript? It was so c l e a r . . . or was it?" The first challenge of clear writing is to understand your reader. With this in mind, I polled current and past AMR board members, associate editors, editors, and special issue reviewers to
Many thanks to the AMB reviewers who shared their personal reflections and insights on the craft of clear writing. I also thank the editor, associate editors, and my doctoral students (Dianne Murphy and Kyle Ehrhardt) for their comments and suggestions on earlier
2012. Vol. 37. No. 4. 490-501. hltp*dx.doi.org/10.M65/amr.2012.0165
EDITOR'S COMMENTS: REFLECTIONS ON THE CRAFT OF CLEAR WRITING
Writing is hard work. A clear sentence is no accident. Very few sentences come out right the first time, or even the third time. Remember this in moments of despair. If you find that writing is hard, it's because it is hard (Zinsser, 2006: 9). Most of us struggle with our writing. We thrash and hack our way through paragraphs, writing and editing and rewriting until we think we've made some progress on that God-forsaken manuscript. The next morning we turn on the computer, read the file, and realize that our work of art is a muddled mess. We curse, hit the delete key, and start again. It can be a frustrating process, particularly for theory papers, which are all about the writing. But we hang in there. We finish the manuscript and submit it to AMR. We wait. We wait some more. We get the reviews. The rejection stings, but the reviewer's comments are worse: "I'm puzzled as to what exactly you are trying to accomplish here." "The first twenty-three pages are an endless literature review." "I had to read several pages into the manuscript to get a hint about what you are trying to achieve." "What exactly is this paper about? After reading it twice, I'm still not sure."^ We open the freezer and reach for the HäagenDazs. We think, "What is wrong with these reviewers? Why couldn't they understand the point of my manuscript? It was so c l e a r . . . or was it?" The first challenge of clear writing is to understand your reader. With this in mind, I polled current and past AMR board members, associate editors, editors, and special issue reviewers to
Many thanks to the AMB reviewers who shared their personal reflections and insights on the craft of clear writing. I also thank the editor, associate editors, and my doctoral students (Dianne Murphy and Kyle Ehrhardt) for their comments and suggestions on earlier