Academy of Management Discoveries
Before submitting to AMD, first visit the home page of the Academy of Management Discoveries website to understand the philosophy behind AMD, as well as the papers that AMD is inclined to publish.
Types of AMD Submissions
Here are the four types of submissions that AMD publishes:
- Traditional papers (with rare exception) are no more than 40 pages in length, not including references, tables, figures, or appendices.
- Discoveries-in-Brief papers are under 20 pages in length, not including references, tables, figures, or appendices. We also require under 20 references in a Discoveries-in-Brief paper.
- With this type of submission, authors submit the introduction, methods, measurement info, and analysis plan of a completed or planned study. This is helpful for situations in which the exploratory results (whether present or not) may have important theoretical or practical implications. Registered reports should be no more than 25 pages in length, not including references, tables, figures, or appendices.
- Guideposts are short (up to 1,000 word) papers solicited from a small set of the most distinguished, senior scholars in our field. Consistent with the primary mission of AMD—the aim of Guideposts is to leverage the knowledge, experience and intuition of renowned scholars in order to identify those phenomena or patterns of relations requiring the kind of empirically driven studies that AMD seeks to publish.
Traditional Paper Structure
Because AMD seeks empirical studies of poorly understood yet important phenomena, we expect they will be directed by specific research questions and conjectures rather than testing refined hypotheses. This implies several distinct goals for the different sections of your manuscript.
Introductory paragraphs: The introduction should clearly ground the phenomenon and the research question. While this can be done many ways, we encourage this grounding to clearly describe a particular case or instance of the phenomenon, and the context or settings in which it exists. This grounding should also include a statement of the specific research question that guides the study of the phenomenon, why it is important, and how it is addressed in the paper.
The findings will be focused on your empirical exploration, culminating in one or more discoveries. For example, a discovery may highlight new boundary conditions for some theory. A discovery may question accepted understandings of the mechanisms
underlying a relationship, or completely overturn basic assumptions underlying a particular theory. A discovery may demonstrate some relationship that is simply inconsistent with a variety of relevant theories and provide a plausible explanation
as to when and why this is the case.
Discussion. The aim of most AMD papers is to use empirical findings to provide plausible, data-driven descriptions of and explanations for phenomena, relations, and anomalies for which extant theory falls short. In contrast to other empirical journals, which require extensive theorizing in the manuscript’s front end, in AMD papers most of the theory-relevant material is presented post-hoc and found in the paper’s discussion. This is why AMD is described in terms of being context-forward rather than theory-forward. In this way, the discussion provides a framework to guide further theory generation and a basis upon which to ground propositions and even testable hypotheses.
The AMD Review Process
- You will be assigned an Associate Editor and at least two reviewers will review your manuscript. You are encouraged to recommend one or two Associate Editors in your cover letter.
- The Associate Editor has sole discretion over whether your paper is invited for a revision and/or ultimately accepted.
- AMD strives to reflect the voice of the authors, not that of the reviewers or editors.
- AMD editors strive to make a publication decision after one round of the double-blind review process.
Criteria for Publication
At AMD each reviewer is asked to use the same template to evaluate your manuscript. This template is based on the mission of AMD and the unique characteristics of AMD. Please read through this template carefully before you submit your manuscript.
In addition to these criteria, manuscripts are judged on writing style, structure, and length. Poor presentation is sufficient reason for the rejection of a manuscript. All articles published in AMD must be accessible to the Academy's wide-ranging readership. Manuscripts should be written as simply and concisely as possible without sacrificing meaningfulness or clarity of exposition.
Authors should prepare their manuscripts in accordance with AOM's Style Guide. In the Abstract (of no more than 200 words) authors should briefly describe the discovery presented in their paper and its potential implications for advancing management knowledge and practice. Manuscripts should be double-spaced, use one-inch margins and 12-point Times New Roman font (not “Times” or other font choice).
Manuscripts that do not follow this style guide will be returned to their authors without review.
To submit a manuscript, first make sure you have a Word file from which the title page and all author-identifying references have been removed. Then go to the
ScholarOne Manuscripts website
and follow the directions. If you need assistance uploading your paper, please contact the ScholarOne helpline on weekdays between 3:00 a.m.-8:30 p.m. EST at 1-434-817-2040, ext. 334 (United States), or 001-434-817-2042, ext. 334 (international).
When authors submit their manuscripts to AMD for publication consideration, they agree to abide by the journal's publication requirements. Violation of any of the following requirements listed below will be treated as a violation of the
Academy of Management's Code of Ethical Conduct and will result in appropriate penalties.
Authors must state affirmatively that a manuscript submitted for review and possible publication in
Academy of Management Discoveries:
- Is prepared and formatted according to the journal's Style Guide for Authors.
- Has NOT been submitted previously to AMD for review.
- Is NOT under review for publication elsewhere.
- Will NOT be submitted to another publication entity until AMD makes a final publication decision.
- Does NOT use data that are reported in any other manuscript, published or not, except as explained in the cover letter to the Editor.
Submission of manuscripts previously published in Academy of Management Annual Meeting Proceedings or previously presented at a conference or currently under consideration for presentation at a conference is acceptable. Submission of a manuscript to AMD also carries an implicit quid pro quo: willingness to review for AMD. The cornerstone of the editorial process at AMD is the willingness of colleagues to provide each other feedback through peer review. Authors who submit manuscripts to AMD for review are expected to reciprocate by reviewing for AMD if called on to do so.
Reject and Workshop Invitation
If you have the start of a strong idea for an AMD paper, but the editor or associate editor deems the paper unlikely to be successful, you may be given a reject decision along with an invitation to revise your manuscript and submit to the next virtual AMD paper-development workshop . If you receive this invitation we will reserve one of the limited spots in the next virtual workshop for you (up to a certain date), and you would not have to respond to the open call for workshop participants. This invitation would apply only if you are working on the same project. The benefit of the workshop is that you will receive dedicated time to work one-on-one with one or more members of the editorial team (editor, associate editor, editorial review board member), as well as hearing feedback given to other workshop attendees. Assuming substantial changes are made prior to and as a result of the workshop, you would then be able to resubmit your manuscript as a new submission to AMD should you be interested in doing so. As with any participant, attending the AMD workshop would not guarantee that the paper would be accepted to AMD.
AMD is an electronic journal designed to leverage online technologies to achieve rapid and broad dissemination of important research, engage authors and readers in meaningful conversations, and promote meaningful applications. Authors of accepted
articles will be invited to post short videos that illustrate their discoveries and its significance. Authors also will be encouraged to participate in online conversations about their work using the journal's online social media tools.
In recent years, management scholars have noted—and lamented—the absence of engaging writing in our field (e.g., Alvesson & Gabriel, 2013; Caulley, 2008; Dane, 2011; Tourish, 2020). Among other problems, this lack of engaging writing limits our ability to effectively engage a variety of audiences, thus inhibiting the reach of our work. AMD has relaunched Discoveries-in-Brief, along with a slightly modified review process, to address this area for improvement in management scholarship.
There are two main goals for Discoveries-in-Brief. The first is to empower authors to craft their manuscripts in nontraditional ways that make for tighter, more engaging narratives. Narratives in peer-review papers are often fragmented or underdeveloped. Consider the following observation by a science writer, concerning the typical experience of engaging with academic work:
One lesson I’ve learned is that it can take work to piece together the story underlying a paper. If I call scientists and simply ask them to tell me about what they’ve done, they can offer me a riveting narrative of intellectual exploration. But on the page, we readers have to assemble the story for ourselves. (Zimmer, 2020)
In writing for Discoveries-in-Brief, you can—and should—provide a riveting narrative. Your story should speak for itself, so that no “assembly” by the reader is required.
The second goal for Discoveries-in-Brief is to provide a streamlined review process that enables these articles to be published as quickly as possible. Manuscripts that are submitted as Discoveries-in-Brief—or that are identified by the editorial team as possible Discoveries-in-Brief articles—will be handled by either Erik Dane (Associate Editor) or Kevin Rockmann (Editor) and will be considered for expeditious publication, subject to the paper’s reception by the review team.
What are the core elements of a Discoveries-in-Brief article?
As with all AMD articles, Discoveries-in-Brief articles must connect directly to management and organizational research. Because AMD is a “big tent” journal representing the entire academy—encompassing micro, meso, and macro perspectives on behavior—a wide range of research topics are suitable for publication in Discoveries-in-Brief, provided the authors make the connections to the field evident.
Also, as with all AMD articles, Discoveries-in-Brief articles can be based on any empirically grounded methodology. Thus, findings based on experiments, surveys, archival records, interviews, and ethnographic observations (among other possible sources of data) are all viable candidates for consideration. By design, these articles do not require direct evidence of underlying mechanisms. Nevertheless, authors should be able to provide preliminary evidence or compelling speculation concerning what might account for the results or phenomena of note.
Why would I submit a Discoveries-in-Brief?
There may be many motivations for doing so, including:
- You are interested in writing a galvanizing piece akin to a newspaper or magazine feature article reporting on your empirical exploration.
- You are bored with the traditional structure of journal articles and would like to try something different.
- You wish to work on your creative writing skills to make your academic writing more engaging or develop your capacity to write for a broader range of audiences.
- You have timely, relevant data and want to get your findings published in a timely way.
What are the page and reference limits for a Discoveries-in-Brief article?
Under 20 pages of standard text, not including references, tables, figures, appendices, title page, and abstract. Under 20 references.
How should a Discoveries-in-Brief article be structured?
We are all familiar with the traditional boilerplate structure for publishing in academic journals—introduction, literature review, methodology, analysis, results, and discussion. Discoveries-in-Brief articles need not conform to this structure. In fact, because these submissions must be less than 20 pages of standard text, authors should privilege parsimony and consider how to distill their contribution into a concise yet coherent framework. Think of a Discoveries-in-Brief article as a feature-length article that might appear in a newspaper or magazine (e.g., Bloom, 2014; Gawande, 2011; Weingarten, 2007). You have the freedom in this format to simply tell the story (Pollock & Bono, 2013; Ragins, 2012) and thus, engage your readers from start to finish. Some options for you to think about with regard to structure:
- Place your methodology and perhaps even some of your findings in tables/appendices.
- Incorporate data throughout the entire piece in a clear and transparent manner.
- Use succinct titles and headings, tight paragraphs, and smooth transitions to make your work accessible for as wide of an audience as possible (including students and practitioners of management and people who value high quality feature writing).
It is easier to publish a Discoveries-in-Brief article?
No. These articles are not “AMD Lite.” That is, the distinction between Discoveries-in-Brief articles and other AMD articles is not simply a matter of page length. One of the benefits—and challenges—of publishing such an article is liberation from the structures to which we are typically tethered. Executed effectively, the entire article is readable for a broad range of audiences. A Discoveries-in-Brief article should be comprehensible and compelling in the hands of colleagues, students, managers, journalists, relatives, friends, and enemies. This type of article houses a clear, well-specified insight. It should be easy for anyone reading the article to appreciate and summarize its focus.
How much creativity is welcome?
Discoveries-in-Brief articles provide authors with a rare opportunity: license to innovate. This license is not limited to the manuscript’s structure alone. Engaging writing is valued, as well. Discoveries-in-Brief encourages personal voice, creative expression, and emotional content—provided clarity is not sacrificed for the sake of style. Done skillfully, writing can be both clear and creative. Discoveries-in-Brief articles can serve to illustrate this point.
Are commentaries or “thought pieces” welcome for Discoveries-in-Brief?
No. As with all AMD manuscripts, Discoveries-in-Brief should be empirical articles undertaken to study compelling phenomena without a priori hypotheses.
To submit a manuscript: go to ScholarOne Manuscripts/AMD and follow the directions.
Alvesson, M., & Gabriel, Y. 2013. Beyond formulaic research: In praise of greater diversity in organizational research and publications. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 12: 245-263.
Bloom, P. 2014. The war on reason. The Atlantic, March, 2014. https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2014/03/the-war-on-reason/357561/
Caulley, D. N. 2008. Making qualitative research reports less boring: The techniques of writing creative nonfiction. Qualitative Inquiry, 14: 424-449.
Dane, E. 2011. Changing the tune of academic writing: Muting cognitive entrenchment. Journal of Management Inquiry, 20: 332-336.
Gawande, A. 2011. Personal best. The New Yorker, September 26, 2011. https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2011/10/03/personal-best
Pollock, T. G., & Bono, J. E. 2013. Being Scheherazade: The importance of storytelling in academic writing. Academy of Management Journal, 56: 629-634.
Ragins, B. R. 2012. Reflections on the craft of clear writing. Academy of Management Review, 37: 493-501.
Tourish, D. 2020. The triumph of nonsense in management studies. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 19: 99-109.
Weingarten, G. 2007. Pearls before breakfast. Washington Post, April 8, 2007. https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/magazine/pearls-before-breakfast-can-one-of-the-nations-great-musicians-cut-through-the-fog-of-a-dc-rush-hour-lets-find-out/2014/09/23/8a6d46da-4331-11e4-b47c-f5889e061e5f_story.html
Zimmer, C. 2020. How you should read coronavirus studies, or any science paper. New York Times, June 1, 2020. https://www.nytimes.com/article/how-to-read-a-science-study-coronavirus.html?algo=identity&fellback=false&imp_id=116908739&action=click&module=Science%20%20Technology&pgtype=Homepage
Guideposts are short (up to 1,000 word) papers solicited from a small set of the most distinguished, senior scholars in our field. Consistent with the primary mission of AMD—to disseminate new, empirically driven insights regarding phenomena or patterns of relations that current concepts fail to take account of, and extant theories fail to adequately explain—the aim of Guideposts is to leverage the knowledge, experience and intuition of renowned scholars in order to identify those phenomena or patterns of relations requiring the kind of empirically driven studies that AMD seeks to publish. With Guideposts, AMD seeks to provide all management scholars with the opportunity to learn from our field’s visionaries and thought leaders, and to get first-hand suggestions regarding the most glaring gaps and disturbing anomalies or inconsistencies remaining to be bridged or resolved in a given research domain.
Guideposts content will
- surface or propose new ways or new approaches for exploring emergent and/or poorly understood phenomena with potentially significant implications
- identify unanswered or emergent questions, as well as nomological networks worthy of future empirical exploration.
- highlight anomalies and research inconsistencies demanding a resolution.
Registered Reports at AMD
With its focus on empirical exploration, AMD is open publishing papers reporting negligible or non-effects (see Miller & Bamberger, 2016). Such reports can be especially useful when conducting audit studies, which are typically used to capture and assess discrimination (see for example Ameri, Rogers, Schur, & Kruse, 2020). In cases in which results (whether present or not) may have important theoretical or practical implications, scholars are encouraged to follow a Registered Report submission approach. Using this approach, authors submit the introduction, methods, measurement info, and analysis plan of a completed or planned study. Results, if already available, are not to be submitted. This abbreviated paper is then evaluated on the basis of the importance of the topic, the merit of the selected analytic approach, methodological rigor and quality, and potential for impacting down-the-road theorizing and/or practice/policy. Because no results are reported, what was or is likely to be found has no bearing on the outcome of the evaluation.
Using this results-blind approach, our aim is to have authors submit interesting, important, empirically grounded studies meeting AMD’s standards for methodological rigor, but without concern for the direction or statistical significance of the findings. With the focus on the research question, potential implications and rigor, the study is evaluated regardless of whether the findings are supportive (or not) of some a priori hunch, replicate or question prior findings, or demonstrate evidence or no evidence of some treatment effect.
Using this approach, authors will receive a decision from the action editor indicating whether and how their study will be subsequently handled. Action editors may conditionally accept the registered report, they may ask for a revision of the registered report, or reject the registered report but allow for the project to be submitted following regular paper submission procedures. Registered reports deemed incompatible with the mission of AMD may also be desk rejected or rejected after review. Such reports cannot be submitted following the regular paper submission track. Any registered report that reaches “conditional accept” stage will be ultimately evaluated on whether the authors actually conducted the study and present the findings as outlined in the registered report.
Authors are advised to consult with the Editor-in-Chief if they have questions about the submission process. Correspondence with the Editor prior to submission can help determine an approach that makes sense for the project in question.
Developing media enhancements is not about making pretty pictures.
It’s about doing better social science.
AMD uses multimedia to engage, communicate, and illustrate experiences that text cannot accomplish. As an online publication, AMD goes beyond what traditional print journals can do. We are interested in evidence for your research claims, as well as experiences that provide new or better ways of knowing.
Examples of multimedia enhancements can include:
- special videos
- data excerpts
- dynamic models
- dynamic models
Media files can be uploaded as part of your original submission. To upload multimedia files:
- Go to https://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/amd
- From "File Upload" designate the file type as supplementary file for review
- Make sure all author-identifying references have been removed
- Some author supplied multimedia may require hosting outside of the AMD platform
- Your multimedia should only use the following file types:
- VIDEO: .WMV or .MP4
- AUDIO: .MP3 only
AMD strives for quick publication and dissemination of important research results. The journal's review process is designed to efficiently evaluate whether articles submitted for review are worthy of publication.
Upon receiving a manuscript, the editor will complete a preliminary screening to assess the degree to which it fits the criteria described above. A submission that fails to satisfy these criteria or one that the editor considers to have little chance of becoming publishable after one round of revision will be returned to the authors without further review. Manuscripts that the editor considers suitable for peer-review will be assigned to an action editor and then go through a double-blind review process. The action editor will make a publication decision based on his or her own evaluation taking into consideration the comments and recommendations of the reviewers.
Communicating a discovery often requires the unique voice of the author to appreciate its nature and context. Therefore, AMD will strive to use review processes that leaves the authors' voice intact rather than over-imposing the voices of the reviewers or editors. To accomplish this, papers will be assessed from the author's framework and perspective rather than those of the reviewers or editors. Moreover, we will strive to make final publication decisions after no more than one revision.
Submission of a manuscript to AMD also carries an implicit quid pro quo: willingness to review for AMD. The cornerstone of the editorial process at AMD is the willingness of colleagues to provide each other feedback through peer review. Authors who submit manuscripts to AMD for review are expected to reciprocate by reviewing for AMD if called upon to do so.
Directions for Users with an Account
Go to the Manuscript Central Website at http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/AMD and log in. At the Welcome Page, go to Author Center. On the right-hand side of the page, you will see Author Resources. Click below to submit a new document.
This is a six-step process.
- Type, title & abstract
- Document Type: From the drop-down menu, select type of document.
- Insert title.
- Insert abstract (if you are submitting a proposal, insert a brief description about your proposal).
- Keyword: We require that you submit three keywords for each document you are submitting. From the drop-down menu of keywords, select a keyword, then click Add.
- Authors & institutions
- This page allows you to add additional authors.
- Details & comments
- Answer all questions on this page. Please note that you should include any acknowledgements in the Cover Letter section. All author identifiers must be removed from your work prior to submission. Refer to submission requirements for details.
- File upload
- Please note that File Designation is a drop down list and refers to the type of document that the author is uploading: cover letter, main document, supplementary file for review (which can be viewed by editors and reviewers), or supplementary file not for review (for the editor's eyes only).
- Review & submit
- This page allows you to review your entire application and make any necessary changes before submitting.
If you need assistance uploading your paper, please contact the ScholarOne helpline on weekdays (Monday - Friday)between 2400 - 2030 EST (UTC - 5) at 1-434-964-4100 or 1-888-503-1050 (US). You may also email them at: email@example.com or visit their website.
Directions for New Users
Go to the Manuscript Central Website at http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/AMD. On the right-hand side, you will see a box that says New User? Click on "Register here."
Registering is a three-step process.
- Email and name: Enter salutation, name, and email address
- Address: Enter mailing address
- User ID & password: Here, you must create a password.
- Keyword: We require that you submit three keywords for each document you are submitting. From the drop-down menu of keywords,select a keyword, then click Add
- Unavailable dates: This is only for reviewers. Please leave blank.
- Signature: Insert your name and title.
- Browse: This should be left blank; you will upload your document later.
If you need assistance uploading your paper, please contact the ScholarOne helpline on weekdays (Monday - Friday) between 2400 - 2030 EST (UTC - 5) at 1-434-964-4100 or 1-888-503-1050 (US). You may also email them at: firstname.lastname@example.org or visit their website,