SUBMISSION
HOME       POLICIES       SUBMISSION        PEOPLE        ARCHIVES         CONFERENCES        CONTACT
Author Guidelines

Manuscripts should be submitted in an editable format produced by MS Word is preferred. 

By submitting a manuscript, the author certifies that it is not under simultaneous consideration by any other publication; that neither the manuscript nor any portion of it is copyrighted; and that it has not been published elsewhere. Exceptions must be noted at the time of submission. Submissions are refereed (double-blind review). Accepted manuscripts are subject to editorial changes made by the Editor. The author is solely responsible for all statements made in his or her work, including changes made by the editor. Submitted manuscripts are not returned to the author; however, reviewer comments will be furnished.

A submitted paper is initially reviewed by the Editor to determine whether the topic and treatment are appropriate for readers of the Journal. It is rare but it is possible for an exceptional manuscript to be accepted at this stage. Manuscripts rejected at this stage are insufficiently original, have serious scientific flaws, have poor grammar or English language, or are outside the aims and scope of the journal. Those that meet the minimum criteria is then evaluated by two or more independent referees (double-blind review). The policy of double-blind review means that the reviewer and the author do not know the identity of each other. Reviewers will not discuss any manuscript with anyone (other than the Editor) at any time. Should a reviewer have any doubt of his or her ability to be objective, the reviewer will request not to review a submission as soon as possible upon receipt.

Whenever possible, reviewers are matched to the paper according to their expertise. We can accept suggestions of reviewers from the author, though these recommendations are not necessarily used.

The time required for the review process is dependent on the response of reviewers. However, the typical time is between 3-8 weeks. Should the reviewers' reports contradict one another or a report is unnecessarily delayed, a further expert opinion will be sought. In rare cases for which it is extremely difficult to find a second reviewer to the manuscript, or when the one reviewer's report has thoroughly convinced the Editor, decisions at this stage to accept, reject or ask the author for a revision are made on the basis of only one reviewer's report.

The Editor's decision will be sent to the author with recommendations made by the reviewers, which usually includes verbatim comments by the reviewers. Revised manuscripts might be returned to the initial reviewers who may then request another revision of a manuscript.

If accepted for publication, the paper is edited to meet Journal standards. Accepted manuscripts are subject to editorial changes made by the Editor. The author is solely responsible for all statements made in his or her work, including changes made by the editor. The author is also responsible for the completeness and accuracy of their work, including references. The Editor assumes that authors have obtained all necessary permissions and followed appropriate internal review procedures prior to submitting their work. Proofs are sent to the author for final inspection before publication.

Reviewers may look for the following in a manuscript.

Theory: Does the paper have a well-articulated theory that provides conceptual insight and guides hypotheses formulation? Equally important, does the study informs or improves our understanding of that theory? Are the concepts clearly defined?

Literature: Does the paper cite appropriate literature and provide proper credit to existing work on the topic? Has the author offered critical references? Does the paper contain an appropriate number of references (e.g., neither over - or under - referencing does not occur)?

Method: Do the sample, measures, methods, observations, procedures, and statistical analyses ensure internal and external validity? Are the statistical procedures used correctly and appropriately? Are the statistics’ major assumptions reasonable (i.e., no major violations)?

Integration: Does the empirical study provide a good test of the theory and hypotheses? Is the method chosen (qualitative or quantitative) appropriate for the research question and theory?

Contribution: Does the paper make a new and meaningful contribution to the management literature in terms of all three: theory, empirical knowledge, and management practice?

Citation in a review: Finally, has the author given proper reference or citation to the original source of all information given in their work or in others’ work that was cited?



Submission Preparation Checklist

As part of the submission process, authors are required to check off their submission's compliance with all of the following items, and submissions may be returned to authors that do not adhere to these guidelines.

1.The submission has not been previously published, nor is it before another journal for consideration (or an explanation has been provided in Comments to the Editor).

2.The submission file is in Microsoft Word.

3.When available, the URLs to access references online are provided, including those for open access versions of the reference. The URLs are ready to click.

4.The text is single-spaced; uses a 12-point font; employs italics, rather than underlining (except with URL addresses); and all illustrations, figures, and tables are placed within the text at the appropriate points, rather than at the end.

5.The text adheres to the stylistic and bibliographic requirements outlined in the Author Guidelines, which is found in About the Journal.

6.If submitting to a peer-reviewed section of the journal, the instructions in Ensuring a Blind Review have been followed.

Online Submissions

Author Guidelines

Copyright Notice

Privacy Statement