Academy of Management

AMP Call for Special Issue Papers: Managing for Our “New Normal”: How to Foresee, Prepare for, and Repair after Extreme Events
2026-01-01 00:00 - 2026-01-31 00:00 (America/New_York)
Guest Editors:

Witold (Vit) Henisz, University of Pennsylvania

Alan Meyer, University of Oregon

Dean Shepherd, University of Notre Dame

Christopher Wright, University of Sydney

Zhaohui Wu, Oregon State University

AMP Associate Editor:

Oana Branzei, Western University, Canada

Background

Once unprecedented, extreme events ranging from climate-related natural disasters and displacements to school shootings, devastating wars, enduring conflicts, and refugee crises have becoming increasingly common.1 Their recurrence compels us to find better ways to organize, not only in their aftermath, but also in anticipation.

Extreme events shape many aspects of our economies, ecosystems, and communities, and though commonly deemed “unthinkable tragedies,” they tend to follow recurring patterns. Some communities are more vulnerable to floods and wildfires and earthquakes than others. Pandemics recur also. So do riots. And wars. And displacement. Treating such extreme events as outliers demotivates initiatives and innovations that could ready existing systems to repeated occurrences of similar events in the future. Yet learning from, and especially across, extreme events pose significant challenges.2 Some organizations prove essential,3 while many remain ill-prepared, even for disasters they should have seen coming.4

This Academy of Management Perspectives (AMP) Special Issue aims to provide actionable, evidence-based insights that clearly and credibly guides managers and their organizations through the extreme events that have become part of our new normal. We seek to shift attention from retrospective reflections5 and actions6 toward prospective ways to ready organizations and occupations for the worst to come. We are especially interested in disruptions that could be better described as becoming common, at least in some new types of organizations.7

Please note that AMP’s mission and format differ from many other leading academic journals. AMP papers are managerially driven, not theory driven. Successful submissions clearly define the managerial issue from the outset and make a compelling case for its importance. They do not simply tack managerial implications on to a standard academic study. Rather, AMP papers provide actionable insights that guide managerial behavior and influence policy decisions. We strongly encourage potential authors to review AMP’s guidelines before submission. Note that we also welcome Practitioner Perspectives essays and Constructive Confrontations papers for this special issue. Guidance for both formats is also on our website.

Scope and Open-Ended Research Questions

For this special issue, we welcome submissions of relevant, rigorous, and readable papers that address a broad range of enduring and/or recurring extreme events, including but not limited to: wars and armed conflicts; refugee movements and forced displacement; natural disasters and climate events; public health crises and pandemics; terrorism and political violence; economic disruptions and financial crises; technological and cybersecurity crises; social unrest and protests; industrial and environmental accidents; complex crises (polycrisis). Our aim is to develop actionable, evidence-based insights into how to better organize for the new normal of extreme events, we focus on eight major themes and suggest several areas of inquiry for each. The open-ended questions suggested for each theme offer tentative starting points and are neither comprehensive nor exclusive of alternative perspectives or phenomena.

Facing Undesirable Futures: How can organizations or occupations come to see and make futures when they expect extreme events to recur with greater intensity and frequency? How should actors reconsider their values and positions when futures become riskier and/or more uncertain? Which collaborative processes best allow for course corrections?

Bracing for Impact: How can practitioners brace for the psychological injury that may accompany exposure to different types of crises? How should protagonists overcome fear to act courageously? How can decision-makers sustain hope and stave off despair when extreme events keep unfolding? What are the best ways for decision-makers to reflect, collect, and communicate key lessons to their stakeholders?

Sustaining Sense and Meaning: How should protagonists engage the moral tensions that often accompany recurrent extreme events? How can dynamics of sense breaking and sense making, sense contracting and sense expanding, or sense asking and sense giving influence learning before, during, and after extreme events? How do vulnerable parties hold on to meaning when catastrophes loom inevitable?

Evolving Supply Chains: How can the thresholds of supply chain vulnerability for different types of extreme events be determined? How can buffers be designed to anticipate critical disruptions? How should vulnerability and resilience be reconceptualized?

Climate-Proofing Systems. How can actors ready their operations, organizations and occupations for climate change? How should preparations vary with different types of events? How can policy makers trigger or renew commitment to regeneration? How can the type of actor (e.g., celebrities, more-than-human actors) influence responses to climate-related extreme events?

Organizing in War and Peace: In wartime vs. peacetime, how can altruistic decisions be promoted over self-interest? How should stakeholder interactions change when peace turns to war? How can the interests of stakeholders be protected when wartime extreme events jeopardize entire categories, markets, or economies?

Bearing the Losses. How should rights and responsibilities change after losses have been incurred? How should rights and responsibilities be fulfilled when extreme events are considered natural disasters versus when they are understood as so-called normal accidents, preventable through high reliability organizing? Through what mechanisms should losses be deemed inevitable and acceptable, perhaps even insurable?

Organizing Far from Equilibrium: How should organizations and occupations anticipate or adapt outside the limits of current knowledge and outside their domains of expertise? How can novel, counterintuitive or alternative forms of anticipation and action become routinized?

We welcome both conceptual and empirical papers that are grounded in rigorous analysis and directly support specific and significant managerial and policy actions. We welcome accounts of embodied, lived experiences of extreme events and use of reflexive methodologies. Quantitative analyses of large databases, qualitative comparative analyses, and extensive data analysis using linguistic programs and algorithms are also needed. In short, we want papers that show what can or does work, in ways that managers and policymakers can use.

Deadline, Submission, and Review Process

The deadline for submission is 31 January 2026 at 23:59 ET (DST+1,UTC-4). All submissions must be uploaded to the AMP Manuscript Central website between 1 January and 31 January 2026.

All papers will be reviewed according to the current policies of Academy of Management Perspectives. AMP papers should be grounded in evidence or robust conceptual frameworks, address relevant real-world managerial and policy issues, offer actionable insights, avoid theory fetish, and be written in a style accessible to non-specialists and practitioners.

We intend to host a Paper Development Workshop at the 2025 AOM Conference in Copenhagen for selected authors to further develop their manuscripts. Participation in this workshop is neither a guarantee nor a prerequisite for publication.

Endnotes

1 Phillip H. Phan, “Redeeming Management Scholarship in a Time of Crisis,” Academy of Management Perspectives, 36, no. 2 (2022), 711-12.

2 Claus Rerup and Mark Zbaracki, “The Politics of Learning from Rare Events,” Organization Science, 32 no. 6 (2021), 1391–414.

3 Russell E., Browder, Stella Seyb, Angela Forgues, and Howard E. Aldrich, “Pandemic Makers: How Citizen Groups Mobilized Resources to Meet Local Needs in a Global Health Crisis,” Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 47 no. 3 (2023), 964-97.

4 Emily Lalonde, Brent McKnight, and François-Nicolas Robinne, “Does Wildfire Exposure Influence Corporate Disaster Preparedness? A Study of Natural Resource Extraction Firms in Canada,” Organization & Environment, 36 no. 4 (2023), 590-620.

5 Graham Dwyer, Cynthia Hardy, and Steve Maguire, “Post-inquiry Sensemaking: The Case of the ‘Black Saturday’ Bushfires,” Organization Studies, 42 no. 4 (2021), 637-61.

6 Trenton A. Williams, and Dean A. Shepherd, D. A., “Bounding and Binding: Trajectories of Community-organization Emergence Following a Major Disruption,” Organization Science, 32 no. 3 (2022), 824-55.

7 Róisín Jordan and Duncan Shaw, “The Role of Essential Businesses in Whole-of-society Resilience to Disruption,” Academy of Management Perspectives. https://doi.org/10.5465/amp.2023.0079

AMR Special Topic Forum: Marginalized Workers and Marginalized Populations in Organizations
2026-01-01 00:00 - 2026-01-31 00:00
Submit via the AMR Manuscript Central Site

Submission Deadline: 31 January 2026

Guest Editors

John Amis, Prithviraj Chattopadhyay, Aparna Joshi, Jamie Ladge, Kristie Rogers, Madeline Toubiana, Paul Tracey, and Alexis N. Smith

Special Topic Forum Overview

In recent decades, the nature of work and the composition of the workforce have changed dramatically. As many workplaces have become more diverse, inclusive, and global, and as work itself takes on new forms (e.g., gig work, remote work, nontraditional hours), the Academy of Management Review has led STFs (e.g., diversity; changing nature of work relationships, the “new normal”) and From the Editor articles (e.g., inequality) to advance theory accordingly. Yet, much of management theory still reflects assumptions and constructs developed within a specific socio-cultural and economic context—often implicitly centered around a predominantly white, male, white-collar, 9-to-5 workforce in Western contexts. It is imperative to examine how theories that arose within particular contexts may overlook or marginalize other experiences. For example, constructs that assume access to resources, job security, or linear career trajectories may not capture the lived realities of those in precarious, part-time, or informal work settings. Likewise, theories predicated on homogeneity within worker identity groups may miss key insights from those who navigate multiple, intersecting identities.

This forum will consider theoretical contributions that challenge or extend existing management theorizing and constructs to better represent a diverse range of workers, including those who work outside traditional paradigms and may experience marginalization within their work contexts.

Call for Contributions

We encourage submissions that address the complex and evolving dynamics surrounding marginalized workers and populations in organizations. Topics may include but are not limited to:

Re-evaluating Theoretical Assumptions about Behavior in Organizations

How do historical assumptions underlying core theories in our field impact our understanding of marginalized workers today?

In what ways do traditional or existing theoretical domains that inform workers’ experiences (e.g., employee attitudes, decision making, work-life interface, team dynamics, power and organizational politics, career advancement, motivation, conflict) need to evolve to reflect the experiences of diverse workers, including those who may not conform to professions or office-based work schedules?

Movements, Social Activism, and Institutional Change

How do social movements and grassroots activism influence organizational change, especially in promoting the diversity, equity, and inclusion of marginalized workers?

What roles do marginalized workers play in social activism within organizations, and how do these movements drive institutional change?

How can management theories better incorporate the influence of social activism and the agency of marginalized populations in effecting systemic change?

Social Evaluation: Stigma, Legitimacy, and Reputation

How do processes of stigma, legitimacy, and reputation management play out for marginalized workers and groups within organizations?

What strategies do workers and organizations use to navigate and resist stigma associated with various forms of marginalization, and how do these impact career trajectories?

How can theories on legitimacy and reputation be expanded to capture the experiences and unique challenges faced by stigmatized or nontraditional workers?

Economic Diversity and the Dynamics of Marginalized Communities

How do social class backgrounds influence workers’ experiences and their ability to navigate organizational environments?

What unique challenges and opportunities arise for social class transitioners or those from lower socioeconomic backgrounds entering higher-status professions?

How does economic diversity shape interactions, career progression, and identity within organizational settings, particularly for workers in emerging economies?

How do dynamics of organization-community relations shift in the context of marginalization?

Intersectional Identities and Undertheorized Dimensions of Workplace Inequality

How do marginalized identities (e.g., race, gender, socioeconomic background, neurodiversity, country of origin) impact experiences of inclusion, advancement, and discrimination in organizations in ways that existing theories cannot explain?

How can intersectionality theorizing help us better understand the complexities of marginalized workers’ experiences and contribute to more inclusive organizational practices?

Nontraditional Work Settings and Emerging Workforce Models

How do theories on professionalism and workplace dynamics apply (or fail to apply) in gig work, remote work, and other nontraditional employment arrangements?

What are the implications for marginalized populations who may disproportionately occupy these roles, and how might management research better capture their unique experiences?

How and when do marginalized individuals create new organizations or organizational forms that might better enable inclusive experiences and spaces?

Leadership and Marginalized Populations

How do traditional leadership theories and styles accommodate (or fail to accommodate) the needs and perspectives of marginalized workers and populations?

What new leadership frameworks or practices emerge from marginalized groups, and how can these reshape existing paradigms in management research?

How do marginalized workers navigate leadership roles, and what barriers and enablers influence their success in these positions?

Emotion, Hate, and Shame in Marginalization

What role do emotions like hate and shame play in shaping marginalized workers’ experiences within organizations, and how do such emotions impact identity, motivation, and sense of belonging?

What strategies do individuals and groups use to navigate or mitigate emotional experiences (e.g., shame, resentment) that arise through stigmatization? How might they impact and inform theorizing on emotions in organizations or other change processes?

Embodiment and Marginalization

How is the body itself implicated in processes of marginalization, and in what ways may these dynamics reinforce social hierarchies within organizational settings?

How might we more fully account for embodied experiences of marginalization, considering how physical and visible aspects of identity influence perceptions, inclusion, and exclusion in organizational spaces?

Timeline and Submission

The deadline for submissions is 31 January, 2026 at 23:59 ET (DST+1,UTC-4). All submissions must be uploaded to the Manuscript Central website between 1 January, 2026 and 31 January 2026. Guidelines for contributors and the AOM Style Guide for Authors must be followed. To answer questions from authors who are planning to submit to the STF, a team of guest editors will host two online Q&A sessions in March and September 2025. Participation in the Q&A session is not a prerequisite for submitting your paper to AMR and does not does affect the manuscript review process and outcome.

For questions about submissions, contact AMR’s Managing Editor. For questions about the content of this STF, contact Kristie Rogers or Paul Tracey.

AMP Open Call for Papers
2026-01-01 00:00 - 2027-01-31 23:59
Submission Deadline: 31 January 2026

Submit to AMP

ATTENTION! Please disengage the autopilot. Check the muscle memory. We do not want more of the same. Academy of Management Perspectives (AMP) is different.

Are you thinking of submitting a manuscript to AMP? We appreciate your interest. We have a terrific global team of engaged editors eagerly awaiting the opportunity to help develop your work. But please send us papers that fit our unique mission.

AMP publishes papers that matter to managers. Our field has called for managerially relevant work for decades. AMP is here to help realize this important goal. Problem is, our field is not accustomed to relevance. And so out of habit, many send us papers that don’t fit our mission.

If your paper is theory driven, it is NOT suited to AMP. AMP is a journal of first choice for papers that inform managerial practice and policy. We are not a backstop for papers that miss at AMJ, AMR, or other top theory-driven journals. It’s not enough to add managerial implications onto a paper rejected at such journals. AMP papers must be managerially driven from the start.

Do the contents of your paper inform the practice of management in a specific and significant way? After reading your paper, did we learn something new and meaningful about an important aspect of how to manage and govern an organization? Does your paper provide evidence ample to drive managers (including policy makers) to reconsider a particular practice? We will assess your paper by these criteria, and so should you. But be as honest and objective about the relevance of your work as possible. Don’t fool yourself with vague sentiment about broad influence on generic aspects of management. Ask others for their views of your work – especially practitioners. Consider co-authoring with practitioners. But understand: If it is not relevant to managers, then it is not relevant to AMP.

While relevance is our most prominent characteristic, it does not come at the expense of rigor. AMP does NOT publish papers that lack rigorous original analysis. Though our mission differs, our analytical standards are the same as those of other elite journals. Opinions, overviews, descriptive arguments, philosophical treatise, etc. are not within our purview, even if they convey interesting perspectives on management. The managers who rely on AMP content need evidence, not conjecture. So, the claims of an AMP paper must be supported with stringent scholarly analysis. This robust analysis may be empirical (quantitative or qualitative) or conceptual.

Finally, AMP does NOT use the exact same format as other AOM journals. Yes, the fonts and indents and all that good stuff are the same. But because AMP papers must be accessible to a non-specialized audience, we do a few things differently. For one, we use endnotes. For another, we place detailed analyses in supplements and only summarize them in the body of the paper. This allows AMP manuscripts to run about 20 body pages in length, not the standard 30+. We also favor plain language over jargon. And, of course, rather than tack on managerial implications at the end of a paper, AMP papers make the practical case from the start.

To sum up, AMP papers are RELEVANT, RIGOROUS, and READABLE. This means that they must do all of the following:

Inform an issue of evident importance to managerial practice and/or policy, and

Engage in rigorous and original conceptual or empirical analysis, and

Concisely and clearly convey key ideas to a non-specialized audience

For more details, please see these editorials:

(Re)building a Bridge between Scholars and Practitioners: Get AMPed!

Management Practice and Policy: A Guide to Writing for AMP

Mattering Matters: Explaining what Fits at Academy of Management Perspectives

An AMP paper must achieve all of the above criteria, but there is no single format for doing so. Below, we provide a sample format. If you have a better way, we are all ears – so long as it produces a rigorously relevant & readable paper.

Sample Format for an AMP Manuscript

Abstract and title. An AMP paper begins with an engaging but accurate title and a concise abstract of no more than 200 words. Provide potential readers with enough, but only just enough, information to quickly and accurately determine if the article is relevant to them. The abstract should state: a) the important managerial issue motivating the paper; b) how the paper analyzes this important issue; c) what the analysis finds; and d) how these findings substantively affect practice/policy.

Introduction. The content of an introduction overlaps with that of an abstract, but the introduction adds detail. Nevertheless, as with all aspects of an AMP paper, it should be concise. View it as a sort of executive summary. Open with a paragraph or two that draws the reader in, then briefly overview the paper’s structure. Limit the introduction to two double-spaced pages.

Problem statement. The key feature of an AMP paper is its focus on an important managerial issue. From the start, clearly articulate the focal issue and make a convincing case for its importance. In addition to scholarly literature, authors may refer to practitioner and government reports, as well as credible media accounts, to validate the importance of the issue. This section should fill two to four double-spaced pages.

What we know. Next, review relevant literature to accurately portray baseline knowledge about the issue. Consider literatures beyond one’s usual disciplinary base, especially if insights are limited within the focal discipline. Again, official reports and statistics from government agencies, NGOs, consulting firms, analysts, etc. may be referenced, so long as they are credible. The length of this section will vary, depending upon how established, multidisciplinary, and debated the issue, but it should not exceed four double-spaced pages. Use summary tables where needed to save space. Anything more can be placed in a supplement.

What we don’t know. What is missing? Make a strong, objective case for omissions, flaws, points of debate or other aspects of the literature that leave the focal issue inadequately explained. This section should be no longer than two double-spaced pages.

Conceptual or empirical analysis. This is the core work of the paper: scientific analysis that provides evidence to bridge the gap in understanding of this problem. The length of this section will vary with the type of conceptual or empirical analysis undertaken. Once again, though, it must be concise. Use plain language and summary charts, figures, and graphs. The usual artifacts of a robust scholarly study are required, but they are placed in a supplement.

What we have learned. This is the paper’s core contribution. Expound on how the findings advance understanding of the focal issue. Delve into implementation steps if the study provides such insights. Discuss boundary conditions, noting where the findings hold and distinguishing contexts in which they do not. Specify constraints on interpretation based upon limitations in data and analysis. Clarify aspects of the issue that remain open and require further analysis. Consider charts, figures, and other ways to visually display the results. Though focused on practical implications, the findings may also bring to light flaws and gaps in theory that warrant mention. This should be the longest section of the paper but, yes, also concise.

Conclusion. Within the space of one or two paragraphs, restate what the paper has done and remind readers why it matters. Do not simply restate the abstract. Conclude on a high note, perhaps with a call to action.

Please heed what we have written above before submitting a manuscript to AMP. Thanks!

Deadline, Submission, and Review Process

The submission deadline is 31 January 2027. Papers must be submitted on the AMP website at https://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/amp.

All papers will be reviewed according to the current policies of Academy of Management Perspectives. AMP papers should be grounded in evidence or robust conceptual frameworks, address relevant real-world managerial and policy issues, offer actionable insights, avoid theory fetish, and be written in a style accessible to non-specialists and practitioners.

Please feel free to contact AMP Editorial Office with any questions.

Be sure to review our Style Guide for manuscript requirements, prior to submitting.
