AMP Open Call for Papers
2026-01-01 00:00 - 2027-01-31 23:59 (America/New_York)
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.

AMP Call for Special Issue Papers: Managing Under Political Turbulence
2026-09-01 00:00 - 2026-09-30 00:00
Submission Deadline: 30 September 2026

Submit via the AMP Manuscript Central Site

Guest Editors:

Jonathan Doh, Villanova University

Srividya Jandhyala, ESSEC Business School

Yadong Luo, University of Miami

Grazia D. Santangelo, Copenhagen Business School

AMP Associate Editor:

Tazeeb Rajwani, University of Surrey

Background

Political turbulence is on the rise, as evidenced most dramatically in violent conflicts (e.g., wars, terrorism attacks), volatile political transitions (e.g., dramatic regime change, cuts to government employees, new geopolitical alliances, coups), and geopolitical tensions (e.g., trade wars, democratic backsliding, sanctions). This escalated political turbulence exacerbates geopolitical risks for organizations and their stakeholders.1 How should they handle it?

Whether anticipatory (e.g., fear of cyberattacks) or actual (e.g., ongoing trade wars, competition over territories), rising geopolitical risks affect organizations in many ways.2 The rise of techno-nationalism,3 driven by national security and ideological concerns, challenges the resilience of global technology supply chains. With the rapid development of AI comes misinformation and disinformation that further aggravate political tensions and ideologies. Tariffs, sanctions, and protectionist trade restrictions bring escalating compliance risks. Rising populist sentiment drives immigration restrictions and is creating a shortage of high-skill talent for MNEs.4

Political turbulence has long been a strategic consideration in some sectors such as energy and defense, but it is now affecting organizations in nearly all sectors,5 both at home and abroad. At home, organizations encounter scrutiny from civil society for their operations in countries with questionable international standing.6 Abroad, they may face interventions by host country governments that vary with their country of origin or type of ownership. All of this presents considerable challenges for managers and their organizations.

This special issue aims to provide actionable, evidence-based insights that clearly and credibly guide managers and their organizations in navigating the political turbulence that increasingly characterizes the international, national, and subnational landscape. We seek to fill in the “glaring white space” of how organizations can best operate under political turbulence, providing robust insights on which practitioners and policy makers can rely.

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 onto a standard academic study. Rather, AMP papers evidence actionable insights that can credibly 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 all formats is on our website.

Scope and Open-Ended Research Questions

For this special issue, we welcome rigorous and insightful submissions that address a broad range of political turbulences associated with various adverse events that disrupt organizations, such as national security clashes, trade conflicts, territorial wars, terrorism, misinformation, removal of government officials, reductions in civil liberties, etc. Our focus is on providing actionable, evidence-based insights of how organizations and managers can best comprehend, influence, internalize, adapt, or mitigate the political risks associated with these changes. Such insights can address firms’ efforts to influence politics and respond to political turbulence, as well as the impact of political turbulence on firms, their employees, and other stakeholders.

Below we provide a set of open-ended questions to evoke topics germane to this special issue. These are starting points and are neither comprehensive nor exclusive, but they’re a good start!

Understanding Different Types and Forms of Political Turbulence. Scholars have distinguished between political risk and uncertainty. Is this classification scheme effective at helping managers understand political turbulence and how to act upon it? Are there better frameworks?

Rethinking Corporate Political Strategies. How should firms integrate corporate political activities (e.g., bridging, lobbying, alliance-building, campaigning, political contributions, regulatory engagement) to best navigate different types of political turbulence? How should firms address covert political activities (e.g. bribery, misinformation, deep fakes)? Which strategies best enable firms to balance global and local political pressures? How should firms deploy corporate diplomacy and activism in an increasingly polarized environment?

Reorganizing and Realigning Geographically Diversified Operations. How can organizations from various regions, countries, and sectors respond and adapt to rapid and often unforeseen political change? How can managers prepare for and be more resilient in the face of these changes? Which organizational structures best support flexibility and resilience in uncertain environments? How should leaders determine which operations to decouple or restructure?

Managing Stakeholder Nationalism. Nationalist sentiment can influence consumer and shareholder behavior and penalize organizations for their political stands and countries of origin. Under what conditions should organizations disengage from, reduce, or change their political activities? Which strategies can organizations adopt to avoid being perceived as political actors?

The Role of New Technologies. What are the best ways to use AI, blockchain, and other digital technologies and intelligence to inform decision-making and improve risk management in a politically turbulent environment? Can firms use such technologies for regulatory compliance and operational agility at the same time? Which new methods (e.g., AI/machine learning, field experience, political training) are best suited to providing an early warning system? What are the trade-offs between quality of insights versus cost of development for such systems?

Managing Corporate Innovation. Groundbreaking innovation often requires combining knowledge and innovation from different sources and locations. How can organizations preserve innovation opportunities despite the increased national security focus? How should organizations evaluate the trade-offs in local versus global efforts in innovation? Which strategies allow them to exploit innovations in new technologies such as AI, quantum computing, and biotechnology while balancing regulatory/political obligations?

Navigating the Race for Talent. The knowledge and social capital of highly skilled migrant workers provides critical insights and valuable connections across borders. Yet political turbulence fosters a populism sentiment that drives anti-immigration policies. How should firms manage talent across borders under these conditions?

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

Deadline, Submission, and Review Process

The final deadline is 30 September 2026 at 23:59 ET (DST+1, UTC-4). All submissions must be uploaded to the AMP Manuscript Central website between 1 September 2026 and 30 September 2026, inclusive.

All papers will be reviewed according to the current policies of Academy of Management Perspectives. AMP papers should be grounded in robust empirical evidence or 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 for selected authors to further develop their manuscripts. Participation in this workshop is neither a guarantee nor a prerequisite for publication.

Endnotes

1. G.K. Adarkwah, S. Dorobantu, C.A. Sabel, and F. Zilja, “Geopolitical Volatility and Subsidiary Investments,” Strategic Management Journal 45, no. 11 (2024): 2275–2306.

2. P. Sun, J.P. Doh, T. Rajwani, and D. Siegel, “Navigating Cross-Border Institutional Complexity: A Review and Assessment of Multinational Nonmarket Strategy Research,” Journal of International Business Studies 52, no. 9 (2021): 1818–53.

3. Y. Luo, “Illusions of Techno-Nationalism,” Journal of International Business Studies 53, no. 3 (2021): 550–67.

4. D. Nayak, S. Moreira, and R. Mudambi, “Restrictive Immigration Policies and MNE Innovation,” Journal of International Business Studies 56, no. 1 (2025): 84–104.

5. S. Jandhyala, The Great Disruption: How Geopolitics Is Changing Companies, Managers, and Work (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2025).

6. M. Mol, L. Rabbiosi, and G. Santangelo, “Should I Stay or Should I Go? How Danish MNEs in Russia Respond to a Geopolitical Shift,” AIB Insights 23, no. 1 (2023), https://doi.org/10.46697/001c.68337.
