OMT Reviewer Guidelines


(updated as of Jan 2022)

The following questions may help you structure your evaluation of the submissions you received and offer constructive feedback to authors. Make sure you cover the three-five most important points, use an appreciative tone (e.g., recognize strengths), and provide developmental feedback (e.g., make actionable suggestions for improvement). Please consult AoM’s reviewer guidelines for additional advice regarding tone and format.   



  • Does the paper address an issue of interest to one or more communities of scholars studying organizations and management?
  • Is there a clear research question with a solid academic motivation behind it?
  • Does the research question hold promise for extending the relevant theoretical conversation?
  • After reading the introduction, did you find yourself motivated to read further?


Theory and theoretical concepts

  • Does the submission contain a clear theoretical approach? If it combines several theoretical approaches, is the relation between the approaches clear?
  • Is extant literature appropriately reflected in the submission, or are critical references missing?
  • Are the key theoretical concepts clearly defined and consistently used?


Method (empirical papers)

  • Are the research design, case selection, sample, and other aspects of the methods explained and justified? Are the phenomena of interest captured well?
  • Are the data collected in an appropriate, transparent, and well justified manner?
  • Are the analytical procedures appropriate for answering the research question and consistent with the theory and the data collection?
  • Is the analysis transparent, justified, and convincing?


Line of argument (conceptual papers)

  • Is the conceptual argumentation clear, logical, and convincing?
  • Is the reasoning precise, concise, and elegant?


Findings (empirical papers)

  • Do the findings offer a compelling, plausible, and consistent interpretation of data?
  • Do the authors present an analytic generalization of the findings that is novel and transferable to other settings, and that engages with extant theoretical insights?
  • Do the authors discuss the limitations of their work and show reflexivity about possible alternative explanations and analytical orientations?


Findings (conceptual papers)

  • Does the submission provide novel conceptual insights that are clearly spelled out and carefully positioned in relation to established ideas in the literature?
  • Do the authors discuss the scope of the novel insights?



  • Do the authors address implications of their work for the scientific community?
  • Does the submission have implications for relevant stakeholders, such as organizational members, managers, policy makers, and members of the broader society?
  • Does the submission produce novel insights, interpretations, or explanations that extend the literature in organization and management theory?
  • Does the submission stimulate thought or debate?



  • Is the submission easy to read and follow?  
  • Are the different components of the submission coherent with one another?
  • Do you have constructive ideas that may help the authors develop their work further?