Discussion: View Thread

A note for the Program Chair on the Call for Reviewers and Submissions

The success of the 2015 Entrepreneurship Division's Academy program depends on the efforts of our membership. Each person reading this message has already been or will be involved in making this meeting work. My particular job is to encourage and coordinate the submission and evaluation of papers and symposia that make up the Scholarly Program that occurs on Monday and Tuesday of the meetings, as well as the discussion papers and All Academy sessions that are part of the Sunday meetings. I welcome all to participate in this process, and I provide information that will help you to do so.

First, I urge you to volunteer to review papers (and symposia) as the more reviewers we have the less burden there will be on any one reviewer. You can sign up now to be a Reviewer-- whether you submit a paper or not!! Things happen very quickly once all work has been submitted by mid-January. Based on recent experience, we may have in the neighborhood of 750 submissions, requiring 2200+ reviews to be completed, processed, and assessed in a very short window. This process is initiated by an automated assigning of reviewers to papers/ symposia via the designation of key words selected by reviewers and authors. Please take special care in selecting the Key Words for your paper and for you as a Reviewer to ensure the best matching. 

This process is not the same as you would get from a journal submission. There will be no give and take between reviewers and authors, the managing editor (me) cannot look at each of 700-800 submissions to arbitrate, balance and decide. Reviewers have but a few weeks to examine and review three papers. If you review, I would urge you to give a careful reading to each paper, to render your judgments impartially, and to express those judgments in the most developmental and kind manner possible. There can be no greater gift to an author than a careful, complete, and kind review. However, we must all realize that not everyone will have the time to write a detailed, two-page review for each submission. The ratings you give on the scales provided will be the means for determining the fate of the paper. However, what you say to the authors (in at least a paragraph or two) about the core of your assessment will be what is most useful. Please do explain why you came down where you did in your judgment.   

You should be aware that the review template provided by the Academy has the following items to rate for paper review: theoretical contribution, appropriate methodological rigor, analyses, clarity of writing/presentation, "award-worthiness," and overall recommendation. For conceptual papers, the second and third items will not be relevant. For all papers, the theoretical contribution item will likely be weighted most heavily. For symposia, the items are how coherently the presentations fit together, the probability that new light will be shed on issues, how carefully thought out the symposium is, and overall recommendation. An additional question asks whether the symposium matches the Academy theme. As a reviewer, you may be assigned papers or symposia or both. This assignment is done by the Academy. 

The Academy provides for approximately 50% of papers (and symposia) to be accepted; of the papers accepted, 10% will be designated as Discussion Papers and will be presented on Sunday. Some of the regular papers can be nominated to be presented on Sunday during the All-Academy sessions if they are especially apropos to the Academy theme, which in 2015 is "Opening Governance." (Please see the Entrepreneurship Division-specific website for details). 

Fit with Academy-theme will not be used as a primary criterion for selection. However, it will likely be used as a tie-breaker in some cases.

We are jointly about to undertake a massive task, one that is conducted by many people devoting their time without compensation or reward. Please take the time, before submitting a paper, to carefully read the submission process and submission guidelines so that your paper will not be rejected because of an avoidable error.

Let me thank in advance all of you who will devote your efforts to being reviewers. You will not be thanked directly by those whose future work may benefit from your kind attention and feedback.

Let me also thank in advance all of you who work so diligently to create and submit interesting and insightful scientific papers that have the potential to advance our field. Alas, there is a certain amount of randomness and fortune at play. Here is some career advice on the "right attitude" to take: use the following decision-tree: (1) if rejected, attribution = bad luck! (2) if accepted, attribution = well deserved! 

Hope to see you in Vancouver,

Alain FAYOLLE

ENT Division - Program Chair 2015

A note for the Program Chair on the Call for Reviewers and Submissions

 

The success of the 2015 Entrepreneurship Division’s Academy program depends on the efforts of our membership. Each person reading this message has already been or will be involved in making this meeting work. My particular job is to encourage and coordinate the submission and evaluation of papers and symposia that make up the Scholarly Program that occurs on Monday and Tuesday of the meetings, as well as the discussion papers and All Academy sessions that are part of the Sunday meetings. I welcome all to participate in this process, and I provide information that will help you to do so.

 

First, I urge you to volunteer to review papers (and symposia) as the more reviewers we have the less burden there will be on any one reviewer. You can sign up now to be a Reviewer-- whether you submit a paper or not!! Things happen very quickly once all work has been submitted by mid-January. Based on recent experience, we may have in the neighborhood of 750 submissions, requiring 2200+ reviews to be completed, processed, and assessed in a very short window. This process is initiated by an automated assigning of reviewers to papers/ symposia via the designation of key words selected by reviewers and authors. Please take special care in selecting the Key Words for your paper and for you as a Reviewer to ensure the best matching. 

 

This process is not the same as you would get from a journal submission. There will be no give and take between reviewers and authors, the managing editor (me) cannot look at each of 700-800 submissions to arbitrate, balance and decide. Reviewers have but a few weeks to examine and review three papers. If you review, I would urge you to give a careful reading to each paper, to render your judgments impartially, and to express those judgments in the most developmental and kind manner possible. There can be no greater gift to an author than a careful, complete, and kind review. However, we must all realize that not everyone will have the time to write a detailed, two-page review for each submission. The ratings you give on the scales provided will be the means for determining the fate of the paper. However, what you say to the authors (in at least a paragraph or two) about the core of your assessment will be what is most useful. Please do explain why you came down where you did in your judgment.   

 

You should be aware that the review template provided by the Academy has the following items to rate for paper review: theoretical contribution, appropriate methodological rigor, analyses, clarity of writing/presentation, “award-worthiness,” and overall recommendation. For conceptual papers, the second and third items will not be relevant. For all papers, the theoretical contribution item will likely be weighted most heavily. For symposia, the items are how coherently the presentations fit together, the probability that new light will be shed on issues, how carefully thought out the symposium is, and overall recommendation. An additional question asks whether the symposium matches the Academy theme. As a reviewer, you may be assigned papers or symposia or both. This assignment is done by the Academy. 

 

The Academy provides for approximately 50% of papers (and symposia) to be accepted; of the papers accepted, 10% will be designated as Discussion Papers and will be presented on Sunday. Some of the regular papers can be nominated to be presented on Sunday during the All-Academy sessions if they are especially apropos to the Academy theme, which in 2015 is “Opening Governance.” (Please see the Entrepreneurship Division-specific website for details). 

 

Fit with Academy-theme will not be used as a primary criterion for selection. However, it will likely be used as a tie-breaker in some cases.

 

We are jointly about to undertake a massive task, one that is conducted by many people devoting their time without compensation or reward. Please take the time, before submitting a paper, to carefully read the submission process and submission guidelines so that your paper will not be rejected because of an avoidable error.

 

Let me thank in advance all of you who will devote your efforts to being reviewers. You will not be thanked directly by those whose future work may benefit from your kind attention and feedback.

 

Let me also thank in advance all of you who work so diligently to create and submit interesting and insightful scientific papers that have the potential to advance our field. Alas, there is a certain amount of randomness and fortune at play. Here is some career advice on the “right attitude” to take: use the following decision-tree: (1) if rejected, attribution = bad luck! (2) if accepted, attribution = well deserved! 

 

Hope to see you in Vancouver,

 

 

Alain FAYOLLE

ENT Division - Program Chair 2015

 

 

 

************************************** This message is from ENTREP which is sponsored by the Entrepreneurship Division of the Academy of Management. Please do not post messages with attached files. Commercial messages or spammed messages are not allowed on the list. The use of auto-responder "out-of-office" messages may also lead to your removal from the list. You can manage your subscription options, including joining or leaving the list here: http://aomlists.pace.edu/scripts/wa.exe?SUBED1=entrep&A=1 If you have questions or need help, please contact Dr. John Bunch jbunch@benedictine.edu. Ventures HO!

----
Ce message electronique et tous les fichiers attaches qu'il contient sont confidentiels et destines exclusivement à l'usage de la personne à laquelle ils sont adresses. Si vous avez reçu ce message par erreur, merci de le retourner à son metteur. Les idees et opinions presentees dans ce message sont celles de son auteur, et ne representent pas necessairement celles de l'institution ou entite affiliee dont l'auteur est l'employe. La publication, l'usage, la distribution, l'impression ou la copie non autorisee de ce message et des attachements qu'il contient sont strictement interdits.

This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please return it to the sender. The ideas and views expressed in this email are solely those of its author, and do not necessarily represent the views of the institution or company of which the author is an employee. Unauthorized publication, use, distribution, printing or copying of this e-mail or any attached files is strictly forbidden.

************************************** This message is from ENTREP which is sponsored by the Entrepreneurship Division of the Academy of Management. Please do not post messages with attached files. Commercial messages or spammed messages are not allowed on the list. The use of auto-responder "out-of-office" messages may also lead to your removal from the list. You can manage your subscription options, including joining or leaving the list here: http://aomlists.pace.edu/scripts/wa.exe?SUBED1=entrep&A=1 If you have questions or need help, please contact Dr. John Bunch jbunch@benedictine.edu. Ventures HO!

Dear ENT Colleagues,

To those of you who have already signed up as ENT reviewers, many thanks !

For the others we need your help and commitment, as the success of our ENT program depends on the generosity of our members to serve as reviewers.

As you probably know we need around 700 reviewers to make the ENT program work and today we are still far from this target.

Please sign up as a reviewer for the ENT division by visiting http://review.aom.org/aom.asp

Alain Fayolle

ENT 2015 Program Chair

fayolle@em-lyon.com

Professor of Entrepreneurship

EMLYON Business School