Management Teaching Review

This Journal is a member of the Committee on Publication Ethics.

This Journal recommends that authors follow the Recommendations for the Conduct, Reporting, Editing, and Publication of Scholarly Work in Medical Journals formulated by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE).

Please read the guidelines below then visit the Journal’s submission site https://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/MTR to upload your manuscript. Please note that manuscripts not conforming to these guidelines may be returned. Remember you can log in to the submission site at any time to check on the progress of your paper through the peer review process.

Sage Publishing disseminates high-quality research and engaged scholarship globally, and we are committed to diversity and inclusion in publishing. We encourage submissions from a diverse range of authors from across all countries and backgrounds.

Only manuscripts of sufficient quality that meet the aims and scope of Management Teaching Review will be reviewed.

There are no fees payable to submit or publish in this Journal. Open Access options are available - see section 3.3 below.

As part of the submission process you will be required to warrant that you are submitting your original work, that you have the rights in the work, and that you have obtained and can supply all necessary permissions for the reproduction of any copyright works not owned by you, that you are submitting the work for first publication in the Journal and that it is not being considered for publication elsewhere and has not already been published elsewhere. Please see our guidelines on prior publication and note that Management Teaching Review will consider submissions of papers that have been posted on preprint servers; please alert the Editorial Office when submitting (contact details are at the end of these guidelines) and include the DOI for the preprint in the designated field in the manuscript submission system. Authors should not post an updated version of their paper on the preprint server while it is being peer reviewed for possible publication in the Journal. If the article is accepted for publication, the author may re-use their work according to the Journal's author archiving policy.

If your paper is accepted, you must include a link on your preprint to the final version of your paper.

If you have any questions about publishing with Sage, please visit the Sage Journal Solutions Portal.

1. What do we publish?

1.1 Aims & Scope

1.2 Article types

1.3 Writing your paper

2. Editorial policies

2.1 Peer review policy

2.2 Authorship

2.3 Acknowledgements

2.4 Funding

2.5 Declaration of conflicting interests

3. Publishing policies

3.1 Publication ethics

3.2 Contributor’s publishing agreement

3.3 Open access and author archiving

4. Preparing your manuscript

4.1 Formatting

4.2 Artwork, figures and other graphics

4.3 Identifiable information

4.4 Supplemental material

4.5 Reference style

4.6 English language editing services

5. Submitting your manuscript

5.1 ORCID

5.2 Information required for completing your submission

5.3 Permissions

6. On acceptance and publication

6.1 Sage Production

6.2 Online First publication

6.3 Access to your published article

6.4 Promoting your article

7. Further information
7.1 Appealing the publication decision

1. What do we publish?

1.1 Aims & Scope

Before submitting your manuscript to Management Teaching Review, please ensure you have read the Aims & Scope.

1.2 Article types

1.2.1 Experiential Exercises

The Experiential Exercises section of the Management Teaching Review (MTR) publishes topically targeted, easily implemented “classroom” (both face-to-face and online) exercises and activities that are of interest and immediate use to professionals in the field of management education, including instructors, coaches, and trainers.

Experiential “exercises” serve specified learning objectives, such as learning specific concepts or gaining specific skills. “Activities” often serve process objectives that relate to the climate, functioning, and/or management of the immediate event. Activities include introductions, icebreakers, energizers, team-building games, 'feel-good' morale builders, etc.

MTR seeks original submissions that present something new or something with a brand-new twist—the exercise should not merely rehash something from the past. Authors must have had experience running the exercise or activity in their teaching or training. It is recommended that it is an activity that the authors have run multiple times.

Submissions should not exceed 2000 words; this word count is a firm limit, but it refers to the main text only. It does not include the abstract, figures, tables, references, notes, or appendices.

The general structure of manuscripts describing Experiential Exercises is outlined below.

[Introduction]. (Note that APA discourages use of the header “Introduction.” The first part of the manuscript is assumed to be the introduction). Provide a brief introduction that establishes a need for this type of exercise.  and identifies Identify potential course applications and the target audience: (early undergraduate, late undergraduate, graduate, etc.; traditional, non-traditional, cross-cultural, etc.).

Theoretical foundation. Establish the theoretical context of the exercise. While an extensive literature review is not in line with MTR’s mission, do briefly specify the relevant subject matter literature that the exercise is based upon. If space is limited and the background is complex, outline the necessary foundational information in an appendix. Note that most readers will be familiar with both Kolb’s experiential learning theory and Bloom’s taxonomy, so while citing them may be appropriate, there will seldom be a need to explain them.

Learning objectives. Specify the learning objectives for the exercise by articulating the expected changes in knowledge, attitude, or skill that are associated with participation in the activity. The learning objectives evolve from the introduction and theoretical foundation, and consequently, they link the background literature with the steps in the exercise and the focus of the debriefing. The usual format for learning objectives is a sentence stem similar to:

“After completing the exercise, students will be able to …” 

• Learning Objective 1
• Learning Objective 2
• Etc

followed by bullet point items that should that begin with action verbs. Learning objectives should be assessable, so that the instructor will be able to determine whether they have been achieved after utilizing the exercise.

Instructions for running the exercise. Provide details for how to run the exercise by addressing each of the points below. The goal here is to be so clear that a novice instructor can run the exercise after reading the manuscript.

• Overview: Briefly explain the flow of the exercise. 
• Logistics: Identify in detail all the logistics of running the exercise, including preparation (instructor and student); materials needed; any physical setting requirements; total number of participants; team sizes, if appropriate; and timing. For timing, include overall timing and the timing of each portion of the exercise, including realistic minimum and maximum lengths for each step. This information is often best formatted in a table.
• Step-by-step instructions: Specify in detail each step of running the exercise. If the text exceeds the 2000-word limit, consider putting a very short version of the step-by-step instructions or a table with the timings in the main body and provide a much more detailed appendix that gives the reader a compete idea of what to do and when.
• Variations: Describe possible variations and alternatives in applications. Given the changes that have generally taken place during the pandemic, consider including instructions for using the exercise in an online (asynchronous) or remote (synchronous) classroom. If the manuscript will exceed the 2000-word limit, the variations section could be made into an appendix.

Instructions for debriefing the exercise. Provide guidelines for debriefing the exercise to draw out the most learning from it in light of the learning objectives. Guidelines may include discussion questions, tips for instructors, or other procedures. Provide examples of how students commonly respond, suggestions for prompts or techniques to lead students towards the learning objectives when necessary, and suggestions for handling inappropriate student responses. Additional related questions and possible reflective post-exercise assignments that are part of debriefing may be placed in appendices.

Conclusion. Complete the manuscript with a general conclusion that connects the exercise to theory.

Appendices. Use appendices as needed for materials to run the exercise (e.g., handouts, sample assignments, teaching notes). Lengthy teaching notes and possible modifications for other classes and levels of students may be placed in appendices.

Supplemental materials. MTR offers authors an option of posting additional materials to supplement the article, such as additional text, charts, figures, illustrations, photographs, slides, spreadsheets, audio-visual files, or computer graphics. Please discuss ideas and arrangements for including supplementary files with the editor if/when your article is recommended for publication.

For text supplementary materials, please make sure your name appears on the materials ONLY after your manuscript has been accepted for publication. Make sure your name is not present in any form on these materials or as a result of following a web link.

For audio-visual materials, such as interviews and footage (podcasts and vodcasts), please download and supply online videos instead of just providing a URL.

Please note that Experiential Exercises for MTR require neither extensive grounding in literature nor empirical evidence of effectiveness.

The Experiential Exercises section of MTR is intended, in part, to encourage submissions from MOBTS and I-MOBTS conference attendees, and we especially encourage submissions from authors who have presented their exercises at these conferences.

Prospective authors are encouraged to read the Experiential Exercises published in MTR as models for drafting their own submissions. Please feel free to contact the Editor with questions.

1.2.2 Format Translations

The Format Translations section in the Management Teaching Review (MTR) publishes original articles that report modification(s) of teaching activities from one format or audience to another for use by professionals in the field of management education, including instructors, coaches, and trainers.

Changes in delivery format include changes from on-ground (or face-to-face) to online or blended, and vice versa.

Changes in audience include but are not limited to changes from:

• Executives or graduate students to undergraduate students and vice versa
• Workplace to academia and vice versa
• One cultural context to another, such as from non-international to international students, and vice versa; from users generally familiar with experiential learning to users unfamiliar with experiential learning, and vice versa; or from the business and management context of an earlier time period to that of the present day.

All submissions to the Format Translations section make two contributions. They present both a newly modified activity or exercise that readers can adopt for immediate use and a pathway or process for readers to use in making similar modifications.

If the modification focuses on changes made to an experiential exercise, then the description of the activity follows the guidelines for MTR Experiential Exercises. In addition, the submission addresses the following questions:

• Where can the original version be found?
• Why did it need to be modified?
• How was it modified?

For the pathway that readers can use to modify similar pre-existing materials, the submission addresses the following questions:

• What framework(s), principles(s), or guideline(s) were used in modifying the original material for this format or audience?
• What additional advice could be given to authors regarding modifying similar materials or making modifications for this audience or this format?

The main body of Format Translation submissions should not exceed 2000 words. Authors are encouraged to make use of tables and appendices to meet this limit. Please note that this limit does not include the abstract, figures, tables, notes, references, or appendices.

Prospective authors are encouraged to study the Format Translations published in MTR as examples. Authors are also welcome to contact the Editor to explore options.

1.2.3 Practice-To-Research Connections

The Practice-to-Research Connections section of the Management Teaching Review (MTR) publishes original articles that offer first-person narratives about issues or questions in management teaching practice that may form the basis for future practice-based research. As used here, “practice” refers to both the practice of teaching management education in academic settings as well as in workplace settings. Articles in this section develop, as the title suggests, from engaged practice experience, where authors recognize issues, questions, patterns or phenomena related to the practice of management teaching that are not sufficiently explored in academic literature and for which they have personal insights.

These articles are intended for use by management educators, including both professors and learning and development professionals. Thus, we encourage submissions from professors, learning and development professionals, scholar-practitioners, as well as collaborations between academic and practitioner authors.

The general structure of manuscripts for the Practice-to-Research Connections section is outlined below.

Description of the issue. The first part of the submission introduces the issue or question(s) in the practice of teaching management descriptively. The description may be based on a combination of first-hand experiences, observations, questions, and/or insights. Provided with sufficient detail so that readers will be able recognize it in their own experience, the description leads to the identification of a core issue or question in teaching practice.

For example, an article in this section might:

• Detail learning interventions, face-to-face or virtual, that experience has shown to be of significant utility to the practitioner and which hint at fruitful connection to robust theory
• Narrate accounts of unique or novel approaches to identification of management learning needs, design and/or selection of teaching and learning solutions and interventions, and transfer and evaluation of learning
• Describe innovative responses to rapidly changing environments and resource constraints in the organizations of today
• Recount how they are coping with the learning and development of managers today who may be less tenured than their predecessors.

Connection to theory. Having described the situation in practice, the article casts out fine lines of enquiry to connect the experience with relevant theory. This overview of the literature acknowledges and discusses relevant debates and voices around the chosen issue/question in an endeavor to help answer the remaining challenges and problems identified in practice.

Suggestions for future research. By pointing out deficiencies and gaps in the academic literature, the article suggests an agenda for future researchers to consider. Thus, the remainder of the article explores and integrates the author’s personal experiences around these core ideas with specific suggestions for management teaching practice-based research. The author’s experiences and observations may result in a set of proposed best practices around the core ideas, insights that require further examination, or more formal research propositions that encourage future research in management education.

The main body of the submission should not exceed 2000 words; please note that this word count does not include the abstract, figures, tables, references, notes, or appendices.

General guidelines for authors are available online. Authors are also welcome to contact the Editor to explore options.

1.2.4 Research-To-Practice Insights

The Research-to-Practice Insights section in the Management Teaching Review (MTR) publishes original articles that evaluate and synthesize published research to identify possibilities for teaching or training practice that could be immediately useful to professionals in the field of management education, including instructors, coaches, and trainers.

The general structure of manuscripts for the Research-to-Practice Insights section is outlined below.

[Introduction]. (Note that APA discourages use of the header “Introduction.” The first part of the manuscript is assumed to be the introduction). The first part of the paper usually takes the form of a very brief introduction to the theme, question, problem, or practice addressed in the paper. Its aim is to set the context for the subsequent sections.

Literature Review. About half of the paper consists of a substantial but tightly focused review of current literature. The research reviewed may be from any discipline, may be author’s own work or that of others, and may represent a variety of disciplinary, theoretical or methodological approaches. This literature review acknowledges and discusses relevant debates and voices around the chosen theoretical framework and leads to core idea(s) that can be applied to enhance teaching or training practice.

Teaching Implications. The remainder of the paper draws out implications of this body of research for teaching and/or training. These implications may be presented in a variety of ways, for example, as principles about how one might apply these insights, as specific teaching strategies, and/or as concrete examples illustrating the application of the principles in teaching practice. To make the author’s insights practical for readers, this part of the manuscript includes:

• Discussion of the intended level and group of learners for whom the approach may be appropriate – e.g. undergraduate, postgraduate, work-based, or executive
• Outline of expected learning outcomes
• Evaluation of benefits as well as potential risks
• Suggestions for additional resources

Submissions should not exceed 2000 words; please note that this word count does not include the abstract, figures, tables, references, notes, or appendices. Because of the tight word count limits, supporting texts that can help readers quickly apply the lessons of the paper may be included as tables, figures, or if necessary, appendices.

Prospective authors are encouraged to read the Research-to-Practice Insights published in MTR as models for drafting their own submissions. Authors are also welcome to contact the Editor to explore options.

1.2.5 Resource Reviews

The Resource Reviews section in the Management Teaching Review (MTR) critically appraises a wide range of innovative materials that are of interest and immediate use to professionals in the field of management education, including instructors, coaches and trainers. Resources include — but are not limited to — reviews of books, applications (apps), textbooks, wikis, technology (e.g., clickers), webcasts, podcasts, online courses, faculty development experiences, websites, case studies, films, online videos (e.g., TED Talks), images, games, artifacts, software, and simulations. In short, any pedagogical resource, in the public domain, that aligns with the mission of MTR could serve as the subject matter of a Resource Review. Submissions should not exceed 2000 words.

Authors will have had experience using the resource in their teaching or training, and the manuscript will reflect the author’s experience, suggestions, and lessons learned. The following sections are recommended:

[Introduction]. (Note that APA discourages use of the header “Introduction.” The first part of the manuscript is assumed to be the introduction). The first part of the paper may take the form of a very brief introduction that sets the context for the paper.

Resource description. This section (about 800 words) provides a rich descriptive review of the resource. It places the resource in context for a reader who may know nothing about the topic. For example, a film review places the film in context, shares the length, describes the plot, highlights major twists, explores explicit/implicit themes, and so forth. In short, it paints a picture for the reader.

Use in teaching. This section (about 800 words) explores deeply how the resource can be used in teaching/training and provides suggestions for additional teaching uses that demonstrate the resource’s usefulness. For example, can the resource be used as an interactive session? A platform for rich debate? An exam? Share 2-3 uses for the resources and again, provide a rich description of these activities.

• For reviews of audiovisual media, such as movies, television episodes, Youtube videos, or webinars, provide a table of scenes including a brief summary of each scene, the concept(s) illustrated, and start/stop time markers.
• If the review focuses on use in a face-to-face class, add some commentary on adaptations for other formats, such as teaching online, both in synchronous and asynchronous learning teaching environments, or for socially distanced classrooms.

Analysis and comparison. The final section (about 400 words) provides a fair and constructive analysis of the strengths/limitations of the resource (perhaps 2-3 of each) and a comparison with similar resources. The review concludes with information about where the reader can learn more (e.g., websites).

Please avoid discussions of why such tools are important. Focus solely on the resource — not the case for the legitimacy of the resource or resources of this type or other considerations.

Objectivity is critical; reviews do not read like advertisements for the resource. The tone also aims for objectivity.

In general, the author should not be the person who developed the resource under review nor should the author have a connection to the resource that could be construed as a conflict of interest.

Although the suggestions above are intended to provide a common format for Resource Reviews, there are other forms that a Resource Review might take. For example:

• Critical reviews
• Short research notes on the outcomes of adopting a resource
• Reviews of multiple resources in a field or on a topic
• Reviews of a single resource (e.g., a computer case or organizational simulation) from multiple perspectives

Prospective authors are encouraged to read the Resource Reviews published in MTR as models for drafting their own submissions. Please feel free to contact the Editor to explore options.

1.3 Writing your paper

The Sage Author Gateway has some general advice and on how to get published, plus links to further resources. Sage Author Services also offers authors a variety of ways to improve and enhance their article including English language editing, plagiarism detection, and video abstract and infographic preparation.

1.3.1 Make your article discoverable

For information and guidance on how to make your article more discoverable, visit our Gateway page on How to Help Readers Find Your Article Online.

2. Editorial policies

2.1 Peer review policy

Management Teaching Review adheres to a rigorous double-anonymised reviewing policy in which the identity of both the reviewer and author are always concealed from both parties.

Sage does not permit the use of author-suggested (recommended) reviewers at any stage of the submission process, be that through the web-based submission system or other communication.

Reviewers should be experts in their fields and should be able to provide an objective assessment of the manuscript. Our policy is that reviewers should not be assigned to a paper if:

• The reviewer is based at the same institution as any of the co-authors.
• The reviewer is based at the funding body of the paper.
• The author has recommended the reviewer.
• The reviewer has provided a personal (e.g. Gmail/Yahoo/Hotmail) email account and an institutional email account cannot be found after performing a basic Google search (name, department and institution).

Management Teaching Review is committed to delivering high quality, fast peer-review for your paper, and as such has partnered with Publons. Publons is a third-party service that seeks to track, verify and give credit for peer review. Reviewers for Management Teaching Review can opt in to Publons in order to claim their reviews or have them automatically verified and added to their reviewer profile. Reviewers claiming credit for their review will be associated with the relevant journal, but the article name, reviewer’s decision and the content of their review is not published on the site. For more information visit the Publons website.

The Editor or members of the Editorial Board may occasionally submit their own manuscripts for possible publication in the Journal. In these cases, the peer review process will be managed by alternative members of the Board and the submitting Editor/Board member will have no involvement in the decision-making process.

2.2 Authorship

Papers should only be submitted for consideration once consent is given by all contributing authors. Those submitting papers should carefully check that all those whose work contributed to the paper are acknowledged as contributing authors.

The list of authors should include all those who can legitimately claim authorship. This is all those who:

1. Made a substantial contribution to the concept or design of the work; or acquisition, analysis or interpretation of data,
2. Drafted the article or revised it critically for important intellectual content,
3. Approved the version to be published,
4. Each author should have participated sufficiently in the work to take public responsibility for appropriate portions of the content.

Authors should meet the conditions of all of the points above. When a large, multicenter group has conducted the work, the group should identify the individuals who accept direct responsibility for the manuscript. These individuals should fully meet the criteria for authorship.

Acquisition of funding, collection of data, or general supervision of the research group alone does not constitute authorship, although all contributors who do not meet the criteria for authorship should be listed in the Acknowledgments section. Please refer to the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) authorship guidelines for more information on authorship.

Please note that AI chatbots, for example ChatGPT, should not be listed as authors. For more information see the policy on Use of ChatGPT and generative AI tools.

2.3 Acknowledgements

All contributors who do not meet the criteria for authorship should be listed in an Acknowledgements section. Examples of those who might be acknowledged include a person who provided purely technical help, or a department chair who provided only general support.

Please supply any personal acknowledgements separately to the main text to facilitate anonymous peer review.

Per ICMJE recommendations, it is best practice to obtain consent from non-author contributors who you are acknowledging in your paper.                   

2.3.1 Third party submissions
Where an individual who is not listed as an author submits a manuscript on behalf of the author(s), a statement must be included in the Acknowledgements section of the manuscript and in the accompanying cover letter. The statements must:

• Disclose this type of editorial assistance – including the individual’s name, company and level of input
• Identify any entities that paid for this assistance
• Confirm that the listed authors have authorized the submission of their manuscript via third party and approved any statements or declarations, e.g. conflicting interests, funding, etc.

Where appropriate, Sage reserves the right to deny consideration to manuscripts submitted by a third party rather than by the authors themselves.

2.3.2 Writing assistance

Individuals who provided writing assistance, e.g. from a specialist communications company, do not qualify as authors and so should be included in the Acknowledgements section. Authors must disclose any writing assistance – including the individual’s name, company and level of input – and identify the entity that paid for this assistance. It is not necessary to disclose use of language polishing services.

2.4 Funding

Management Teaching Review requires all authors to acknowledge their funding in a consistent fashion under a separate heading.  Please visit the Funding Acknowledgements page on the Sage Journal Author Gateway to confirm the format of the acknowledgment text in the event of funding, or state that: This research received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors. 

2.5 Declaration of conflicting interests

It is the policy of Management Teaching Review to require a declaration of conflicting interests from all authors enabling a statement to be carried within the paginated pages of all published articles.
Please ensure that a ‘Declaration of Conflicting Interests’ statement is included at the end of your manuscript, after any acknowledgements and prior to the references. If no conflict exists, please state that ‘The Author(s) declare(s) that there is no conflict of interest’. For guidance on conflict of interest statements, please see the ICMJE recommendations here.

3. Publishing policies

3.1 Publication ethics

Sage is committed to upholding the integrity of the academic record. We encourage authors to refer to the Committee on Publication Ethics’ International Standards for Authors and view the Publication Ethics page on the Sage Author Gateway.

3.1.1 Plagiarism

Management Teaching Review and Sage take issues of copyright infringement, plagiarism or other breaches of best practice in publication very seriously. We seek to protect the rights of our authors and we always investigate claims of plagiarism or misuse of published articles. Equally, we seek to protect the reputation of the Journal against malpractice. Submitted articles may be checked with duplication-checking software. Where an article, for example, is found to have plagiarized other work or included third-party copyright material without permission or with insufficient acknowledgement, or where the authorship of the article is contested, we reserve the right to take action including, but not limited to: publishing an erratum or corrigendum (correction); retracting the article; taking up the matter with the head of department or dean of the author's institution and/or relevant academic bodies or societies; or taking appropriate legal action.

3.1.2 Prior publication

If material has been previously published it is not generally acceptable for publication in a Sage journal. However, there are certain circumstances where previously published material can be considered for publication. Please refer to the guidance on the Sage Author Gateway or if in doubt, contact the Editor at the address given below.

3.2 Contributor’s publishing agreement      

Before publication, Sage requires the author as the rights holder to sign a Journal Contributor’s Publishing Agreement. Sage’s Journal Contributor’s Publishing Agreement is an exclusive license agreement which means that the author retains copyright in the work but grants Sage the sole and exclusive right and license to publish for the full legal term of copyright. Exceptions may exist where an assignment of copyright is required or preferred by a proprietor other than Sage. In this case copyright in the work will be assigned from the author to the society. For more information, please visit the Sage Author Gateway.

3.3 Open access and author archiving

Management Teaching Review offers optional open access publishing via the Sage Choice programme and Open Access agreements, where authors can publish open access either discounted or free of charge depending on the agreement with Sage. Find out if your institution is participating by visiting Open Access Agreements at Sage. For more information on Open Access publishing options at Sage please visit Sage Open Access. For information on funding body compliance, and depositing your article in repositories, please visit Sage’s Author Archiving and Re-Use Guidelines and Publishing Policies.

4. Preparing your manuscript for submission                                        

4.1 Formatting

• Prepare your manuscript for electronic transmission in MS Word or as an RTF file. Use 12-point Times New Roman typeface, and double-space throughout (including abstract, tables, references, and appendices) in a format that fits U.S. standard business size paper (8 ½” x 11”).
• Make sure that all text is left aligned (i.e., ragged-right edge), all paragraphs are indented, and there is no additional space after paragraphs.
• Insert a running head that reflects the focus of the paper on each page.
• Insert page numbers in the upper right-hand corner after the running head.
• Note the desired placement of tables and figures within the text but do not embed them in the text of the manuscript. Instead, include each one on a separate page at the end of the manuscript. Make sure each is titled clearly and appropriately. Refer to the APA guidelines for more advice.

4.2 Artwork, figures and other graphics

For guidance on the preparation of illustrations, pictures and graphs in electronic format, please visit Sage’s Manuscript Submission Guidelines.

4.3 Identifiable information

Where a journal uses double-anonymized peer review, authors are required to submit:

1. A version of the manuscript which has had any information that compromises the anonymity of the author(s) removed or anonymized. This version will be sent to the peer reviewers.
2. A separate title page which includes any removed or anonymized material. This will not be sent to the peer reviewers.

See https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/Manuscript-preparation-for-double-anonymized-journal for detailed guidance on making an anonymous submission.

Figures supplied in color will appear in color online regardless of whether or not these illustrations are reproduced in color in the printed version. For specifically requested color reproduction in print, you will receive information regarding the costs from Sage after receipt of your accepted article.

4.4 Supplemental material

This Journal is able to host additional materials online (e.g. datasets, podcasts, videos, images etc.) alongside the full-text of the article. For more information please refer to our guidelines on submitting supplemental files.

If using appendices, label them with letters: Appendix A, Appendix B, etc. Start each appendix on a new page, and make sure each appendix is referenced in text in alphabetical order. 

4.5 Reference style

Management Teaching Review adheres to the APA reference style. View the APA guidelines to ensure your manuscript conforms to this reference style.

4.6 English language editing services

Authors seeking assistance with English language editing, translation, or figure and manuscript formatting to fit the Journal’s specifications should consider using Sage Language Services. Visit Sage Language Services on our Journal Author Gateway for further information.

4.7 Keywords and abstracts

To assist readers looking for content you’ve published, use both broadly-based keywords (i.e., “groups” or “diversity”) as well as more targeted keywords directly germane to your content (i.e., “self-managed groups” or “gender diversity”) and use those keywords in your abstract. For more information about selecting and using keywords, please see the document titled “Help Readers Find Your Article” (available at https://www.sagepub.com/help-readers-find-your-article).

Include an abstract of 100–150 words that provides a good idea of (1) the purpose of the article, (2) its teaching and learning focus, and (3) its target audience(s). Use your keywords in the abstract. Avoid placing or repeating introductory or explanatory material in the abstract. Instead, use the abstract as an opportunity to sell your article to potential readers, including reviewers.

4.8 Writing Style

MTR has readers around the globe and, therefore, prefers simple, straightforward but formal language that communicates clearly. Try to avoid using jargon and colloquialisms, unless quoting others, such as your students.

1. Prefer the active voice, which makes it clear who does what.
2. Write using the third person, with the following exceptions:
   • Provide the activity instructions in the simple imperative as much as possible (i.e., “Ask students to…”, “Give students....”). However, if you need to point out who does what, use descriptive (not prescriptive) language (i.e., “The students take turns while the instructor...”, not “The students should take turns...”).
   • If at some point it is necessary to refer to yourself in your manuscript (for example, to describe an experience you had while teaching), please use first person: singular (i.e., “I”) for a single-authored paper and first-person plural (i.e., “we”) for papers with multiple authors. Please avoid using the third person to speak about yourself (i.e., prefer “I considered...” not “The author considered...”).

5. Submitting your manuscript

Management Teaching Review is hosted on Sage Track, a web based online submission and peer review system powered by ScholarOne™ Manuscripts. Visit https://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/MTR to login and submit your article online.

IMPORTANT: Please check whether you already have an account in the system before trying to create a new one. If you have reviewed or authored for the Journal in the past year it is likely that you will have had an account created.  For further guidance on submitting your manuscript online please visit ScholarOne Online Help.

At any time that you need to submit a revision, please use the Revise Submission feature at the website link provided in your acknowledgement email. Please do not upload your revision as if it were a new manuscript. Uploading revised manuscripts as if they were new manuscripts only delays the review and decision process. If you need assistance, please email the Associate Editor assigned to your manuscript or the Editor.

5.1 ORCID

As part of our commitment to ensuring an ethical, transparent and fair peer review process Sage is a supporting member of ORCID, the Open Researcher and Contributor ID. ORCID provides a unique and persistent digital identifier that distinguishes researchers from every other researcher, even those who share the same name, and, through integration in key research workflows such as manuscript and grant submission, supports automated linkages between researchers and their professional activities, ensuring that their work is recognized.

The collection of ORCID IDs from corresponding authors is now part of the submission process of this Journal. If you already have an ORCID ID you will be asked to associate that to your submission during the online submission process. We also strongly encourage all co-authors to link their ORCID ID to their accounts in our online peer review platforms. It takes seconds to do: click the link when prompted, sign into your ORCID account and our systems are automatically updated. Your ORCID ID will become part of your accepted publication’s metadata, making your work attributable to you and only you. Your ORCID ID is published with your article so that fellow researchers reading your work can link to your ORCID profile and from there link to your other publications.

If you do not already have an ORCID ID please follow this link to create one or visit our ORCID homepage to learn more.

If you do not already have an ORCID ID please follow this link to create one or visit our ORCID homepage to learn more.

5.2 Information required for completing your submission

You will be asked to provide contact details and academic affiliations for all co-authors via the submission system and identify who is to be the corresponding author. These details must match what appears on your manuscript. The affiliation listed in the manuscript should be the institution where the research was conducted. If an author has moved to a new institution since completing the research, the new affiliation can be included in a manuscript note at the end of the paper. At this stage please ensure you have included all the required statements and declarations and uploaded any additional supplementary files (including reporting guidelines where relevant).

5.3 Permissions

Please also ensure that you have obtained any necessary permission from copyright holders for reproducing any illustrations, tables, figures or lengthy quotations previously published elsewhere. For further information including guidance on fair dealing for criticism and review, please see the Copyright and Permissions page on the Sage Author Gateway.

6. On acceptance and publication

6.1 Sage Production

Your Sage Production Editor will keep you informed as to your article’s progress throughout the production process. Proofs will be made available to the corresponding author via our editing portal Sage Edit or by email, and corrections should be made directly or notified to us promptly. Authors are reminded to check their proofs carefully to confirm that all author information, including names, affiliations, sequence and contact details are correct, and that Funding and Conflict of Interest statements, if any, are accurate.

6.2 Online First publication

Online First allows final articles (completed and approved articles awaiting assignment to a future issue) to be published online prior to their inclusion in a journal issue, which significantly reduces the lead time between submission and publication. Visit the Sage Journals help page for more details, including how to cite Online First articles.

6.3 Access to your published article

Sage provides authors with online access to their final article.

6.4 Promoting your article

Publication is not the end of the process! You can help disseminate your paper and ensure it is as widely read and cited as possible. The Sage Author Gateway has numerous resources to help you promote your work. Visit the Promote Your Article page on the Gateway for tips and advice.

7. Further information

Any correspondence, queries or additional requests for information on the manuscript submission process should be sent to the Management Teaching Review editorial office.

7.1 Appealing the publication decision

Editors have very broad discretion in determining whether an article is an appropriate fit for their journal. Many manuscripts are declined with a very general statement of the rejection decision. These decisions are not eligible for formal appeal unless the author believes the decision to reject the manuscript was based on an error in the review of the article, in which case the author may appeal the decision by providing the Editor with a detailed written description of the error they believe occurred.

If an author believes the decision regarding their manuscript was affected by a publication ethics breach, the author may contact the publisher with a detailed written description of their concern, and information supporting the concern, at publication_ethics@sagepub.com.