We have just submitted a manuscript for an edited volume to our publisher. (The publisher is well respected in our discipline, but is not a university press, if that makes any difference). We have been asked to name up to five people who would be willing to peer review the manuscript, and I'm slightly lost as to what kind of person it would be best to suggest. Do we go for very senior academics with a track record in this particular field (who might be more critical, but whose feedback might be more useful; although I imagine that senior academics might potentially be too busy to review a volume edited by someone relatively junior), or do we go for more junior colleagues who are perhaps more likely to make the time for this. (We are both ECRs no more than a year or two out of our PhDs, so very very junior in the grand scheme of things). And what is the etiquette? - should I ask people if they are happy to be nominated as reviewers before passing their names on to the publisher, or should I let the publisher contact them in the first instance?
I'm going to have to go through this process again when I submit my monograph in a few months time, so it would be nice to get it 'right' with the edited volume first.