N=1, but I would like to be updated regarding R&Rs, conditional accepts, and book contracts. An R&R at a top 3 might be a game changer. It's a strong signal regarding the quality of your work.
It's all about marginal effect. An R&R in a leading journal may not be a game changer, so I'm not sure if it's worthwhile to update the chair about it. But if you can include the R&R in the original submission, it certainly looks better than otherwise. No?
I try to read even those came in slightly after deadlines. But by then, I know I have a few files in mind already and those late apps look, shall I say, unsatisfactory.
As for waiting on journal decisions, like Olyvia suggested, I think it is generally acceptable that the candidate sends an email to the SC chair, POLITELY informing that s/he now has an accepted piece. I am not sure if one acceptance can be game changer, however.
Fixed deadlines are set up because that's what we are required of by the admin. You know, you need to fill out the forms.
Understood. But do you look at last minute apps? Some of us may be waiting to hear from a journal, hence the last minute apps.
Programs differ on this, but our system lets us see files before the deadline. And most (but not all) in the committee do give a look, which we chat about over lunch table quite a few times. Like many, our culture is to go out for lunch together at least 2-3 times a week and I think we all implicitly agree that doing some work in advance might actually reduce the number of committee meetings we have to have down the road.
In the 3 searches that I was in (one of which I chaired), the short list was pretty much made by the time we `officially' start reviewing files. In fact, it's becoming pretty much of a norm now because 1) doing so saves a lot of time and 2) it didn't seem like the last-minute apps were any better than early apps. The three colleagues we hired are doing okay, so we don't plan to change the model.
And I know we are not alone adopting this sort of model. So if possible, apply early.