The ABCs of Program Committees: Lessons Learned from Serving on PCs
When we hear “PCs,” our minds might jump to Political Correctness or Personal Computers, but in the realm of academia and research, it stands for Program Committees. Serving on Program Committees of conferences in our fields of expertise is not only a testament to our commitment to the global technical community but also brings forth numerous benefits for our professional growth. As someone who has navigated the world of Program Committees, chaired PCs, and been part of leadership in professional organizations such as IEEE, I’ve gathered valuable lessons that can help us maximize our experience and impact while serving on PCs.
1. Finding the Right Balance
Deciding how many Program Committees to commit to can be a personal choice. Typically, engaging in 4-6 PCs for systems or security conferences, and 5-8 for AI/ML conferences per year strikes a good balance. It’s essential to avoid overcommitting to ensure you can dedicate ample time and effort to each review and maintain a healthy presence in your technical community.
2. The Importance of Review Submission Deadlines
Review submission deadlines are not arbitrary; they are crucial milestones in the review process. Adhering to these deadlines and submitting reviews within the designated timeframe ensures the smooth progression of the review process and maintains the integrity of the conference.
3. Striking a Balance Between Optimism and Realism
Approaching submissions with an open mind and aligning acceptance criteria with the conference’s quality standards is key. Embracing a pragmatic outlook and championing deserving submissions regardless of imperfections can enrich the diversity and quality of accepted papers.
4. Transparency and Civility in Reviews
Anonymity in reviews should not translate to incivility or unjust evaluations. Upholding transparency, providing constructive feedback, and maintaining professionalism in reviews are essential for fostering a respectful and productive reviewing environment.
5. Engaging Junior Researchers in the Review Process
Involving junior researchers in the review process can be a valuable learning experience for them and help distribute the reviewing workload. However, it’s crucial to oversee their reviews, ensure their credibility, and step in for contentious submissions to uphold the review’s quality.
In Summary
Program Committees play a pivotal role in defining research excellence by curating top conference publications. Adhering to established ground rules, engaging in fair and constructive reviews, and contributing positively to technical communities through PC service are essential for personal and professional growth. Embracing these principles can enhance the value we derive from serving on PCs and elevate the overall conference experience.
About the Author
Saurabh Bagchi is a professor of Electrical and Computer Engineering and Computer Science at Purdue University, leading the CRISP center focusing on resilience. With a research interest in distributed systems and dependable computing, Saurabh and his team strive to develop and enhance large-scale software systems for societal benefit.
Originally published on Distant Whispers.