Last year, I posted a piece on how to conduct a peer review. I revisit the topic now as I’ve just concluded reviewing six submissions to the 2010 Academy of Management conference. As a post-script to my blog post a year ago, I received a “best reviewer” award from the Organizational Behavior division (one of 80 recipients – over 1200 people reviewed OB division submissions).
This year, I reviewed four paper submissions and two symposium submissions. While the papers are blind-reviewed, the symposiums are not. The format of symposium submissions are different. The submission contains a description of the symposium and approach to presentation, along with a justification that indicates with divisions would benefit from the symposium topic. Each presenter includes 3-5 pages that describes their paper. I welcomed the opportunity to review this different format.
This year, I also submitted a paper….the AOM Management, Spirituality and Religion special interest group has a “best dissertation” competition. They encourage early-stage dissertation concept papers or proposals as submissions. I submitted my draft concept paper. Unfortunately, the submission deadline was January 14th, the same date of my first committee meeting. Had the deadline been a week later, I would have submitted a more complete concept paper, with a research question.
Even so, my submission really benefited from my experience of reviewing papers last year. I had a much better understanding of what the Academy looks for in a submission, as well as examples of the formats for papers. This year, I felt more qualified to comment on research methodology and to question claims and arguments as I reviewed the paper submissions. I am encouraged through this process of becoming a scholar – the Academy of Management needs doctoral students to continue the cycle – I’m glad I’m one of them.