Thank you for your interest in submitting a proposal for the 79th Annual Meeting of the Academy of Management. The submission deadline was January 15, 2019 at 5:00 PM ET (NY Time) and the Submission Center is now closed to new submissions. We still hope to benefit from your participation at this year's Annual Meeting, and we invite you to sign up as a reviewer.
Interested in volunteering as a reviewer? Visit the Reviewer Sign-Up System to create a user account or log in and
choose your areas of expertise. Be sure to check out the reviewer guidelines and resources for
additional information. The sign up process takes less than 10 minutes, and
allows you to select two Divisions or Interest Groups and review no more than
three (3) assignments per division. The sign-up period is happening now, and
the review period is January 25-February 14.
To attend the Annual Meeting conference a program participant must be an AOM member and must be registered for the conference. Program participants are highly encouraged to personally present their submissions.
- All PDW participants listed on a submission must be available to participate from Friday through Saturday.
- All participants on submitted papers, symposia, and caucuses must be available to participate from Sunday through Tuesday.
- All participants on submitted AAT PDWs and symposia must be available to participate on Sunday.
The Rule of One for PDWs
PDW Proposals can be submitted to only ONE Division, Interest Group, or Committee. It is recommended that you contact the preferred sponsoring division, interest group, or committee to discuss your proposal prior to submitting. During the submission process you will have the opportunity to suggest other divisions, interest groups, and committees that would also be interested in the proposal.
The Rule of One for Papers
"A paper can only be submitted to one division or interest group." This long-standing Academy rule is similar to the requirements of most journals.
The Rule of Three for PDWs
"No one may submit to or be associated with more than three (3) Professional Development Workshop (PDW) submissions to an Academy Meeting. No one may or appear on more than three (3) PDW sessions during the PDW Program from Friday to Sunday, regardless of whether the sessions are held on-site or off-site."
PDW Program appearances include all roles that are listed on the PDW program such as chairs, organizers, special guests, speakers, presenters, co-authors, and so on.
The Rule of Three for Papers and Symposia
"No one may submit to or be associated with more than three scholarly submissions (papers and/or symposia) to an Academy Meeting. No one may appear on more than three sessions during the refereed scholarly program from Sunday to Tuesday.
Scholarly Program appearances include all roles that are listed on the scholarly program such as chairs, organizers, special guests, discussants, speakers, presenters, co-authors, and so on.
The Rule of Three + Three (no more than three scholarly submissions + three workshop submissions) serves as a means to ensure broad participation of members. It reduces the likelihood of the program being dominated by a small handful of people, and it helps ensure that no one is committed to appear at more than one place at a time. When people make too many commitments to participate in the conference program, scheduling conflicts often arise. As a consequence, participants may find it difficult to honor their commitments, and the program and the experiences of the attendees will suffer as a result. People who agree to participate in an all-day consortium, for example, are expected to participate for the entire day. They should not leave after an hour to attend another session. No presenter should have to arrive late to one session or leave early to present in another one. Organizers, other participants, and especially the attendees are all frustrated by such behavior. The Rule of Three + Three helps reduce these problems. Participants are better able to fully honor their commitments, and attendees can attend events knowing that the featured speakers will actually be there throughout the event.
How is the Rule of Three + Three enforced?
The PDW and scholarly program submission system will automatically block submissions that violate the rule. The system will inform the submitter of the rule violation and indicate which participant has already been associated with three other submissions. The submitter will have to revise the proposal by removing the violation. The proposal can be revised and resubmitted by the deadline without penalty. A person who agrees to be listed on more than three PDW proposals or three scholarly submissions puts all of those submissions at risk of being dropped from the program. Therefore, it is in the interest of submitters to ensure that everyone understands and follows the rule. Clearly, the implications of including a violator of the Rule of Three + Three on a submission are far-reaching.
NOTE: It is the responsibility of each participant to understand and follow the Rule of Three + Three. If you have committed to participate in three workshops and three scholarly submissions, you should decline further requests.
The following are exempt from the Rule of Three + Three:
- Academy, Division, Interest Group, and Committee Officer Roles. (Note: AOM Program Chairs may not be listed as an author for proposals submitted to the division in which they serve as Chair.)
- Academy and Division General Sessions (Meetings, Social Events, Plenary Session)
- AOM publication editors (current and incoming editors-in-chief) when participating in sessions devoted exclusively to publishing and other AOM journal activities.
- Caucus organizers (maximum of two organizers per caucus are exempt).
- Presenters in the Teaching and Learning Conference.
- Submissions to the Teaching and Learning Conference are exempt from the Rule of Three + Three.
Clarifications for the Rule of Three:
- If a person appears in more than one role in a single session (e.g., chair and speaker), it counts as one for purposes of the Rule of Three + Three.
AOM Code of Ethics
Members should notify appropriate division chairs or committees regarding the practices or actions of members they believe may violate Academy policies, rules, or general standards of ethical conduct. Standards of conduct that are particularly relevant to participation in the annual conference are summarized below. More information about the AOM's professional norms on conference presentations can also be found on the Ethics Video Series on YouTube channel.
- Participation. To encourage meaningful exchange, Academy members should foster a climate of free interchange and constructive criticism within the Academy and be willing to share research findings and insights fully with other members.
- Original Work and New Work. At the time of submission, submitted papers must not have been previously presented or scheduled for presentation at the AOM. Submitted papers must not have been published or accepted for publication. If a paper is under review, it must NOT appear in print before the Academy meeting.
- Attendance and Commitments. ALL program participants must be AOM members AND registered (separate costs) for the conference in order to attend. The Academy is a voluntary association whose existence and operations are dependent on cooperation, involvement, and leadership from its members. Members should honor all professional commitments, including presentation of accepted papers and participation in scheduled roles, such as chair, discussant, or panelist. Program participants are highly encouraged to personally present their submission. If absence from a scheduled meeting is unavoidable, members must contact appropriate individuals and pursue suitable alternative arrangements. Leaders have the same responsibilities and should perform their obligations and responsibilities in a timely, diligent, and sensitive manner, without regard to friendships or personal gain.
- Rigorous Scholarship. It is the duty of Academy members conducting research to design, implement, analyze, report, and present their findings rigorously. Research rigor includes careful design, execution, analysis, interpretation of results, and retention of data. Presentation of research should include treatment of the data that is honest and that reveals both strengths and weaknesses of findings.
Authorship and credit should be shared in correct proportion to the various parties' contributions. Whether published or not, ideas or concepts derived from others should be acknowledged, as should advice and assistance received. Authors should also guard against plagiarizing the work of others. Plagiarism is defined as:
The failure to give sufficient attribution to the words, ideas, or data of others that have been incorporated into a work, which an author submits for academic credit or other benefit. Attribution is sufficient if it adequately informs and, therefore, does not materially mislead a reasonable reader as to the source of the words, ideas, or data. Attribution (or the lack thereof) is materially misleading if it could cause a reasonable reader to be mistaken as to the source of the words, ideas, or data in a way that could benefit the author submitting the work. (Worthen, 2004: 444. Italic for emphasis added).