The last week I attended New York Fed/ New York University Conference at NYU. There were six paper presentations and as the finance convention goes, each presentation was followed by a thorough discussion. The reason I attend finance conferences is the discussions. Unfortunately, in marketing we don’t have a predesignated discussant who critiques the paper in depth. For example, in the recent ACR Conference at Pittsburgh, we had one discussant commenting on 3-4 papers presented in one session. Such duscussions cant be detailed. On the contrary, finance discussions are very detailed and help authors a lot. On the personal front this is a great value addition for me as a doctoral student.
To give you an example, the first paper in NY FED/NYU Conference was about measurement of riskiness of firms. None other than Marcus Brunnermeir is a coauthor of this paper. The authors have been presenting this paper at various conferences across the US. Despite that, Matt Richardson, the NYU discussant, came up with his critique spanning the underlying economics to the empirical methods. Tobias Adrian, the coauthor and the presenter, then responded to Matt and agreed that several of those points were worth considering in the revision of the paper. I saw Tobias writing furiously while Matt was discussing the paper.
I beleive that blazing criticsm of researcher’s work makes the research more valuable. I hope we embrace detailed discussions in marketing as well.