Message from the Program Chair
May 2023
Rachida Justo
AOM ENT Division Program Chair
We are on track for a great Entrepreneurship program in Boston!
This year we received a record 1022 submission for the scholarly program (959 paper proposals and 63 symposium proposals). Based on the time units allocated to use by AOM we were able to accept 483 papers for traditional paper sessions and 41 symposia. The entrepreneurship Division sessions will be held in the Hynes Convention Centre.
Thanks to all for your hard work in putting proposals together, and congratulations to those of you who had your submissions accepted. Our Division members are doing a fantastic work on a variety of topics, using many different methods, and in several unique contexts. I regret we were unable to accept more submission. What makes the difference between an accepted and rejected proposal? As with any scholarly output, the best papers are clearly organized and written, address an important research question, are well positioned within the literature, explain carefully what has been done and what remains to be done, and invite a conversation among session participants. Symposium proposals are similar but address broader themes, emphasize relationships among the presenter´s topics, backgrounds, and approaches, and are likely to engage the interest of entrepreneurship scholars (as well as scholars from other Divisions).
Of course, the review process (especially at this scale) is imperfect. As much as possible, we match proposals to reviewers by keywords – so make sure you choose them carefully! We try to pool experienced and less experienced reviewers and have some variety of backgrounds and experiences, within the constraints established by the keyword matches. I also hope that you have been able to rate your reviewers—reviewing is a hard work, and it would be impossible to put together such a large program without the conscientious efforts of our excellent reviewer pool.
Speaking of reviews, I would like to say a special thank you to all those who reviewed for the Division this year. We are extremely fortunate that just about all volunteer reviewers provided useful and timely feedback with only a small number not making the deadlines. While the majority of reviewers provided extremely good, supportive feedback to help authors take their work forward, some reviewers did provide only limited feedback. Keep in mind that authors are counting on you not only for developmental feedback, but also for your ratings that determine which proposals are ultimately accepted. Thanks again for all you do to make the Entrepreneurship Division great. I look forward to seeing you in Boston!
View earlier entries