| Reviewer Information |
The AOM Specialized Conference on Start-up to Scale-up is recruiting reviewers. We recommend reading the reviewer guidelines to familiarize yourself with the process and review expectations. Thank you in advance for the service you are willing to offer as a reviewer and we hope to see you in Tel Aviv, Israel in December of 2018.
Benefits of Reviewing for the AOM Start-up to Scale-up Conference
Reviewing is a way to learn about what constitutes excellent, innovative, and interesting work.
Reviewers gain visibility for themselves and their institutions.
Reviewing gives you an opportunity to contribute to the program planning process.
Reviewing is a way to give back to your professional community.
We encourage you to volunteer to review for the topics for which you have the most expertise. Each proposal that you review will be a maximum of 7 pages in length and the number of proposals you receive to review will be limited to help ensure high-quality reviews. The reviewer period is happening now, so sign up to review for the AOM Start-up to Scale-up Conference today!
Reviewer Topics
Volunteer reviewers will be asked to select, from the conference themes below, all topics that apply to their area(s) of expertise when signing up to review for the Start-up to Scale-up conference:
- Entrepreneurship
- International Management
- Organization and Management Theory
- Organizational Behavior
- Strategic Management
- Technology
and Innovation Management
Important Dates
June 7, 2018: Reviews Assigned
June 21, 2018: Deadline to Complete Reviews
Reviewer Guidelines
We offer these reviewing guidelines to provide guidance on the type of feedback to provide to submitters in your review comments. Your constructive feedback is essential to support submitters as well as your colleagues attending the AOM Start-up to Scale-up Conference. The quality of the program is strongly influenced by your reviews.
General Areas to Cover
In addition to commenting on the theoretical development of a proposal and the technical correctness of the methodology, you should also consider the overall value-added contribution the proposal offers. Does the proposal pass the “so what” test? Consider if the proposal has practical value, and comment on its implications for the practice community.
Does the proposal reflect the overall level of quality an audience would expect?
Is the proposal of interest to a sufficient number of conference attendees?
Does the proposal offer sufficient innovation and contribution?
Setting the Tone of the Review
Authors must be treated with respect, regardless of your evaluation of their work.
Keep your comments constructive. Provide the authors with constructive ideas to improve their proposal as they develop their research.
Identify the strengths of a proposal
Help authors further develop their research by identifying areas of weakness in a proposal but also provide specific guidance on how the authors might address the limitations you have noted. The more specificity you provide in your review, the more likely it is that the authors will benefit from your efforts.
Be open-minded to different authors using different theoretical frameworks. Judge proposals based on how well they stimulate thinking and discussion. Also, keep in mind that submitters come from varying disciplinary backgrounds and research traditions with diverse theoretical and methodological orientations.
Review Format
To protect the integrity of the “double-blind” review process, do NOT provide information in your review that reveals your identity and do NOT seek to discover the identity of the authors.
Provide a structured review by separating and numbering comments. Where appropriate, cite specific page numbers, passages, tables, and figures in your review.
If you are uncertain about your comments in terms of some aspects of your review, please do your best to determine the accuracy of your position. Remember the quality of your review will help determine if the proposal is accepted or rejected for the program.
