1. Warwick Business School James Hayton Associate Dean & Professor of HRM & Entrepreneurship Editor in Chief Human Resource Management (Wiley) Past Editor: Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice

2. Warwick Business School Manuscript Process Flowchart SubmissionPreparation Desk Reject Action Ed. Decision Reject AcceptR&R Post Accept Screening Select Reviewers Reviews

3. Warwick Business School Good Research? General remarks  What is your contribution? More than just ‘never done before’ Is it clear in first two-three pages?  Is it evident that you are joining a conversation? Are you citing the main research in the domain in the introduction? Have you identified clearly the limitations of that research  Have you stated concisely how your work addresses the limitations identified?

4. Warwick Business School Good Research? General remarks  Unless this is a restriction of the journal itself*, there is generally NO preference for Review versus empirical versus theoretical Qualitative vs quantitative  The key is to meet internationally recognized standards for your work  The two hardest parts are also the most important in the initial stages of review: Introduction Discussion and conclusion *e.g., AMR;AMJ etc.

5. Warwick Business School Preparing to Submit  Identify your target journal(s) Consider where similar research is published Reviews vs Theoretical vs Empirical  Read the Guidelines for Authors and Submission Guidelines carefully  Identify the editor, editorial team, and editorial review board Is anyone currently publishing work in the same area?

6. Warwick Business School Preparing to Submit  Format the manuscript appropriately for the journal If you are submitting a paper originally prepared for another journal reformat if required  Ensure that you cite relevant publications from the target journal Two benefits: ○ You demonstrate the completeness of your literature review ○ You can signal specific reviewers/editors if they have published relevant work ○ Editors HATE it if you omit obvious prior work

7. Warwick Business School The submission process  Most major journals now have online submission systems (either ScholarOne/Manuscript Central, or Elsevier proprietary system)  Identify important key words before you start Keywords assist the search process Consider what keywords similar papers have used  Prepare a BLIND version of your manuscript in advance  Prepare an impactful abstract within word limit

8. Warwick Business School Manuscript Central: Login

9. Warwick Business School Manuscript Central: Author Center

10. Warwick Business School Manuscript Central: Submission Center

11. Warwick Business School Avoiding Desk Rejection  What is Desk Rejection? A mechanism for managing manuscript flow Manuscript submissions have increased 50-100% in last few years Rejection rates are routinely 90% overall Desk reject rates are typically 30-60%  While manuscript submissions increase, the number of available reviewers has not changed significantly

12. Warwick Business School Avoiding Desk Rejection  Desk reject decisions: fit, to journal topic and goals ○ Paper does not address a topic consistent with journal ○ Paper does not provide theoretical/practical insights contribution, in terms of topic, theory and/or empirics ○ Insufficient novelty (replication very often insufficient) ○ Absence of theory ○ Obvious flaws empirical papers (sample, measures, design) ○ Obvious flaws theory papers (lack of testable propositions) overall likelihood of survival ○ Care of preparation, topic novelty, thoroughness

13. Warwick Business School Avoiding Desk Rejection  Editors screen hundreds of manuscripts a year  Consider the importance of heuristics in editorial decision making What do good papers ‘look like’ in the target journal? Is it easy to identify contribution? Are all the pieces there in the correct order/format Have you sent signals of high or low quality?

14. Warwick Business School Responding to Reviewers  Reviewers are lazy, stupid, and egotistical Not really! but the assumption should drive how you respond Lazy: ○ They may have missed points, it is ok to clarify this (politely) Stupid: ○ they may not (do not) know everything, ○ it is possible the reviewer is wrong (see Bill Starbuck) Egotistical: ○ Do not point out that reviewers are lazy and stupid ○ Reviewers want to believe that their comments and suggestions are valuable

15. Warwick Business School Responding to Reviewers  Reviewers are lazy, stupid,and egotistical Not really! but the assumption should drive how you respond lazy, Volunteering their time ○ They may have missed points, it is ok to clarify this (politely) Stupid: may not understand your point ○ they may not (do not) know everything, ○ it is possible the reviewer is wrong (see Bill Starbuck) Egotistical: deserve respect ○ Do not point out that reviewers are lazy and stupid ○ Reviewers want to believe that their comments and suggestions are valuable

16. Warwick Business School Responding to Reviewers  Respond to all points (editor letter should guide you)  Structure the responses on a point by point basis  Number each point  Reproduce comments, then respond, include excerpts from revised text as needed  Use a positive, polite and constructive tone Avoid obsequiousness/flattery Avoid being combative No need to always agree, but always need to justify noncompliance - defend a point with evidence Do not dismiss points as irrelevant, wrongheaded, trivial

17. Warwick Business School Be timely  Earlier responses to R&Rs tend to be more successful  Asking for an extension undermines your credibility with editors  Extensions also mean that reviewers will have forgotten the original paper/review (annoying for them)  If you receive an R&R, that should be given priority

18. Warwick Business School Management Journals…  Want to publish impactful work Citations Practical relevance  This requires Rigor Innovation connection with scholarly ‘conversations’ theory All wrapped up with clear practical relevance

19. Warwick Business School Management Journals…  In addition to simply doing good research: Getting to first review, requires attention to detail Getting past R&R requires ability to adapt your work, to learn from reviewer/editor comments and to persuade reviewers  Good luck!