• 2019 Elections

    (Posted on behalf of By Donald O. Neubaum, Chair of the Entrepreneurship Division)  As Division Chair, I have the honor of working with the Entrepreneurship Nomination Committee to oversee the ENT Division’s elections for our next executive leader ... More

Message from the Program Chair

by Peter G. Klein

We’re on track for a great Entrepreneurship program in Boston! This year we received a record 976 submissions for the scholarly program (919 paper proposals and 57 symposium proposals). Based on the time units allocated to us by AOM, we were able to accept 420 papers for traditional paper sessions, 42 papers for discussion sessions, and 57 symposia, for an overall acceptance rate of 53%. Entrepreneurship Division sessions will be held in the Boston Marriott Copley Place.

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 fascinating work on a variety of topics, using many different methods, and in several unique contexts; I regret that we were unable to accept more submissions.

What makes the difference between an accepted and rejected proposal? As with any scholarly output, the best papers are clearly written and organized, 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 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. If you haven’t already done so, please be sure to rate your reviewers—reviewing is 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: Nearly all volunteer reviewers provided useful and timely feedback, but a few did not make the deadlines. Some reviewers also didn’t provide feedback to the authors. Keep in mind that the 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

Join the Conversation- Discussion Board