1. Article Classification (this value is used for classification rather than scoring purpose) No Somewhat Yes Yes, it is the most important contribution Does the manuscript identify a research question or set of theories of potential interest to managers? Does the manuscript specify the academic perspective on the question or theories? Does the manuscript present one or more descriptions of real-world situations related to the questions/theories employing a narrative format? Does the manuscript analyze how the situations conform or fail to conform to the existing perspectives? Does this manuscript identify the management implications of the situation or situations described and their relationship to theory? 2. Manuscript Ratings This section contains key review questions presented as a scale Sufficiency of tag line ( is the tagline engaging and descriptive) Needs substantial rewriting       Needs tuning       Satisfactory as is       Will sell the article!       Not Provided       Adequacy of keywords ( Will the keywords adequately aid in search ) Too few or too general       Additional keywords would be useful       Satisfactory as is       Will make the article easy to find!       Not Provided       Quality of executive summary Does the executive summary capture the essence of the article and make the potential reader want to dig deeper Does not convey the sense of the article, or is too difficult to understand       Should be tuned further to convey the message and engage the potential reader       Satisfactory as is       Will ensure that the potential reader becomes an actual reader!       Not Provided       Missing Weak Adequate but could be improved Solid Outstanding The significance of the issues being considered ( Dose the manuscript present a story that deals with an important issue ) The degree to which the outcomes of the story are likely to be either novel or confusing to practicing managers (dose the manuscript present a story that readers are unlikely to be familiar with The degree to which the author’s analysis or theory being presented offers a convincing explanation for the findings Does the case provide a strong and logical explanation for what is observed in the case? Sufficiency of the reviewer appendix does the manuscripts reviewer appendix present enough information on the background of the research the conduct of the literature review and the methodology to administrate the rigor behind the research Summary: Is the writing itself of sufficient quality for publication? Pacifically we are interested in grammar spelling and follow No       Barely       With some improvement       Yes       No Barely With some improvement Yes Summary: Is the manuscript sufficiently well organized to warrant publication? (are you able to follow the sequence of the ideas presented?) Summary: Are the ideas being conveyed by the manuscript interesting? (were you ...

1. 1. Article Classification
(this value is used for classification rather than scoring
purpose)
No
Somewhat
Yes
Yes, it is the most important contribution
Does the manuscript identify a research question or set of
theories of potential interest to managers?
Does the manuscript specify the academic perspective on the
question or theories?
Does the manuscript present one or more descriptions of real -
world situations related to the questions/theories employing a
narrative format?
Does the manuscript analyze how the situations conform or fail
to conform to the existing perspectives?

2. Does this manuscript identify the management implications of
the situation or situations described and their relationship to
theory?
2. Manuscript Ratings
This section contains key review questions presented as a scale
Sufficiency of tag line ( is the tagline engaging and
descriptive)
Needs substantial rewriting Needs tuning Satisfactory
as is Will sell the article! Not Provided
Adequacy of keywords ( Will the keywords adequately aid in
search )
Too few or too general Additional keywords would be
useful Satisfactory as is Will make the article easy to
find! Not Provided
Quality of executive summary Does the executive summary
capture the essence of the article and make the potential reader
want to dig deeper
Does not convey the sense of the article, or is too difficult to
understand Should be tuned further to convey the message
and engage the potential reader Satisfactory as is Will
ensure that the potential reader becomes an actual reader!
Not Provided

3. Missing
Weak
Adequate but could be improved
Solid
Outstanding
The significance of the issues being considered
( Dose the manuscript present a story that deals with an
important issue )
The degree to which the outcomes of the story are likely to be
either novel or confusing to practicing managers
(dose the manuscript present a story that readers are unlikely to
be familiar with
The degree to which the author’s analysis or theory being
presented offers a convincing explanation for the findings
Does the case provide a strong and logical explanation for what
is observed in the case?
Sufficiency of the reviewer appendix does the manuscripts

4. reviewer appendix present enough information on the
background of the research the conduct of the literature review
and the methodology to administrate the rigor behind the
research
Summary: Is the writing itself of sufficient quality for
publication? Pacifically we are interested in grammar spelling
and follow
No Barely With some improvement Yes
No
Barely
With some improvement
Yes
Summary: Is the manuscript sufficiently well organized to
warrant publication? (are you able to follow the sequence of the
ideas presented?)
Summary: Are the ideas being conveyed by the manuscript
interesting? (were you engaged the manuscript or would you be
war to be improved )
Overall: How would you recommend disposing of this
manuscript?
To avoid multiple rounds of back and forth revisions and
resubmission information since typically either rejects or

5. accepts( subject to specific revision )manuscripts after the first
round of reviewers thus revise and resubmit is not an option
that we typically over
Reject Reject, but encourage authors to consider the
reviewer comments and, if they can be incorporated into a new
paper, consider a resubmission Accept, subject to the
specific recommendations made in the next section Accept
as-is, with encouragement to consider reviewer suggestions
· Teaching case studies
· It’s clear on teaching objective
· IS the Case Study Easy to Read
· use good content.
· Collect information from sources.
· Identify and establish the issue/problem which used to teach a
concept or theory
The opening paragraph should make clear:
Who the main protagonist is
Who the key decision maker is
What the nature of the problem or issue is
When the case took place, including specific dates.
Why the issue or problem arose.
The body of the case should:
Tell the whole story – usually in a chronological order.
Typically contain general background on business environment,
company background, and the details of the specific issue(s)
faced by the company
Tell more than one side of the story so that students can think
of competing alternatives
The concluding paragraph should:

6. Provide a short synthesis of the case to reiterate the main
issues, or even to raise new questions
Final thoughts on writing
What makes a great teaching case?
· Written in the case teaching narrative style, not in the style of
a research article
· Submitting a case that has been classroom tested and therefore
is much more robust
· Objectivity and considering all sides of a dilemma
· Fit with the objectives of the publication it is included
· Allowing for relevant learning outcomes and enabling students
to meet them effectively.
What makes a good teaching note?
· Clear learning objectives
· Suggested class time, broken down by topics.
· Suggested student assignment
· Brief description of the opening and closing 10-15 minutes
and case synopsis.
· Challenging case discussion questions with sample answers
· Supporting materials – worksheets, videos, readings, reference
material, etc
· Target audience identified.
· If applicable, an update on ‘what actually happened.’
Common review feedback comments
1. The case requires additional information in order to be taught
2. A lack of detail
3. Suggested answers are not supported by the case
4. Learning objectives which apply a model without a purpose
5. No sample answers
6. Not written in the third person or past tense
7. No analysis or lessons learned

7. Qualitative Review
-Comment on the significance of the case being described
the purpose of this question is to let the author(s) know how
you perceived importance of the research question
Comment on the degree to which the findings being examined
are likely to be either novel or confusing to practicing managers
try to list 3 or more valuable or potentially valuable
contributions of the manuscript. In considering these remember
that the manuscript has already passed desk review and at least
in the eyes of the editor in chief it must have some potential
value we need the authors to know that we are examining their
work with the goal of finding value
Comment on the degree to which the analysis or theory being
presented offers a convincing explanation for the findings
this involves the assessing logical flow of the manuscript
Comment on the presentation of findings. Specifically, are they
written in a manner likely to engage readers?
the mission is to present research in manner that is accessible
to practicing managers . indicate if an over -abundance of
academic Jargon is used.
Comment on the reviewer appendix
what changes , if any could be made to their viewer I've been
things to order the ministrat the rigor of the research
In what broad ways could the manuscript be improved?
Focus on big picture issues and make sure that suggestions are
actionable so that the editor can use them when responding to
the authors.

8. suggestions such as,, too long,, ,,not well organized,, or this
is not research are generally not helpful.
Instead, try to be specific in how any problem can be remedied.
for example ,,to reduce the length of the manuscript you could
focus the literature review more directly on the research topic
omitting (some specific example ) or ,,the paper made follow
better if the limitations section were not placed at the very end
of the paper the last thing the reader sees,, and so forth
Specific items that can be improved or corrected (include line
numbers where possible
in this section you can identify examples of bad wording
spelling error messing references grammatical inconsistencies
and other specific defect that can readily be addressed prior to
resubmission
1.
Article Classification
(
this value is used for classification rather than scoring purpose
)
No
Somewhat
Yes
Yes, it is the most
important

9. contribution
Does the manuscript identify a research
question or set of theories of potential
interest to
managers?
Does the manuscript specify the academic
perspective on the question or theories?
Does the manuscript present one or more
descriptions of real
-
world situations related
to the questions/theories employing a
narrative format?
Does the manuscript analyze how the
situations conform or fail to conform to the
existing perspectives?

10. Does this manuscript identify the
management implications of the situation or
situations described and their relationship
to theory?
1. Article Classification
(this value is used for classification rather than scoring
purpose)
No Somewhat Yes
Yes, it is the most
important
contribution
Does the manuscript identify a research
question or set of theories of potential
interest to managers?
Does the manuscript specify the academic
perspective on the question or theories?
Does the manuscript present one or more
descriptions of real-world situations related
to the questions/theories employing a

11. narrative format?
Does the manuscript analyze how the
situations conform or fail to conform to the
existing perspectives?
Does this manuscript identify the
management implications of the situation or
situations described and their relationship
to theory?