If you wish to have color figures in the printed version, the following fees apply: $800 for the first color image, and $200 each for additional color images.

Optional open access publishing is available for a fee via the Sage Choice program, 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. Open Access agreement eligibility is determined by the corresponding author’s affiliation matching an agreement at acceptance. 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.

Open access fees do not cover color charges and are charged separately.

Your article must be within the scope of the journal and be of sufficient quality. If not, it will not be reviewed. Please read the journal’s Aims and Scope to see if your article is appropriate.

The manuscript must be your original work, you must have the rights to the work, and you must have obtained and be able to supply all necessary permissions for the reproduction of any copyright works not owned by you, including figures, illustrations, tables, lengthy quotations, or other material previously published elsewhere.

Article types

Regular Manuscripts

• Your submission (including references) conforms to APA format as outlined in the Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association (7th edition).
• Files should be submitted in Microsoft Word format.
• All text, including references, is double-spaced in 12-pitch or larger font with margins of one inch or more.
• Your title page includes complete contact information for all authors, including mailing addresses, e-mail addresses, phone and fax numbers.
• Your abstract (for regular submissions) is 250 words or less.
• Your submission contains few and only necessary endnotes.
• The text of your submission, including abstract, body of the paper, and references (but not including title page, tables, and figures), is no longer than 35 pages total.
• Any prior publication of the data featured in the manuscript is explicitly acknowledged either in the manuscript or in the transmittal letter to the editor. Any forthcoming or "in press" articles which use the data should be forwarded to the editor with the submission.

GOM usings Manuscripts

• Your submission (including references) conforms to APA format as outlined in the Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association (7th edition).
• Files should be submitted in Microsoft Word format.
• All text, including references, is double-spaced in 12-pitch or larger font with margins of one inch or more.
• Your title page includes complete contact information for all authors, including mailing addresses, e-mail addresses, phone and fax numbers.
• There is NO abstract associated with your submission.
• The text of your submission (but not including title page, tables, figures, and references) is no longer than 2,000 words total.
• Any prior publication of the data featured in the manuscript is explicitly acknowledged either in the manuscript or in the transmittal letter to the editor. Any forthcoming or "in press" articles which use the data should be forwarded to the editor with the submission.
• Your manuscript meets one or more of the following goals outlined in Cruz, Zagenczyk and Griep (2022): (1) refresh readers minds about a particular topic of interest to the field, (2) cause readers to re-think their old (and often outdated) assumptions or opinions, (3) spark a needed debate about a particular topic relevant to the field, (4) shape thinking about a new topic relevant to the field, and/or (5) topics of which you feel there is a need for a well-reasoned rant, supported by evidence.
• Your manuscript is written in such a way that your personalities shine through; GOMusings are thus somewhat different than your traditional academic manuscript. Please consult previously published GOMusings for style and formatting.

GOM Now Manuscripts

• Your submission (including references) conforms to APA format as outlined in the Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association (7th edition).
• Files should be submitted in Microsoft Word format.
• All text, including references, is double-spaced in 12-pitch or larger font with margins of one inch or more.
• Your title page includes complete contact information for all authors, including mailing addresses, e-mail addresses, phone and fax numbers.
• Please prepare a 150-word abstract that provides an overview of the paper. Consistent with the goals of GOM Now, consider using a Plain Language Summary (PLS; https://www.sagepub.com/plain-language-summaries).
• The text of your submission, including abstract, body of the paper, and references (but not including title page, tables, and figures), is no longer than 2,500 words total.
• Your manuscript adheres to the following structure, see also Kessler (2021):
• Introduction
• What is your research topic? Why is this topic important? Why do business leaders at all levels need to know about your research?
• What is known about research in this area specifically relevant to the research reported in the manuscript?
• How does your manuscript add to the body of knowledge?
• Inclusion of a theoretical mechanism is optional.
• Include your hypotheses or research questions.
• It might be helpful to review medical and nursing journals. These fields tend to use shorter introductions than our field.
• Methods/Results
• In these sections, we are looking for you to provide your reader with basic ideas. Who were the participants? How did you recruit them? What did you ask participants to do? How did you collect data (e.g., measures you used for survey data)?
• How did you analyze your data? What did you find (i.e., results)?
• You may use statistical terminology here, but just explain the terminology (i.e., do not assume your readers know terms like CFA and SEM).
• Discussion
• Summarize what you found in one paragraph.
• Explain to the reader why these findings are important and helpful for practice, that is, why do the findings reported in the manuscript matter?
• Provide clear and useful practical implications. What should practitioners do with your findings? How do they apply your findings to the workplace?
• What are future research questions that we should be asking?
• Your manuscript includes a Methods/Results Appendix: Manuscripts must be methodologically sound for when someone "looks under the hood." For example, here is where you can include full CFA results or statistics used to justify aggregating data. Just because you do not include some of these things in the manuscript, doesn't mean they haven't been done. Therefore, please include full methods/results sections as supplemental material. These sections should look like a traditional Methods/Results section. This will help speed up the review process. These sections will be published online so that readers can go a bit deeper if they choose.
• Any prior publication of the data featured in the manuscript is explicitly acknowledge either in the manuscript or in the transmittal letter to the editor. Any forthcoming or "in press" articles which use the data should be forwarded to the editor with the submission.
• Please consult previously published GOM Now articles for style and formatting.

GOMethods Manuscripts

GOMethods is an opportunity to communicate important and discrete methods and procedure research topics. These topics and their treatment are not as technical or “grand” as is common in “methods” journals. Rather, we seek to publish methods and measure resources accessible to a very wide audience, including Ph.D. students. This article type is a manifestation of GOM as a developmental journal.

• Your submission (including references) conforms to APA format as outlined in the Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association (7th edition).
• Files should be submitted in Microsoft Word format.
• All text, including references, is double-spaced in 12-pitch or larger font with margins of one inch or more.
• Your title page includes keywords (3 min; 5 max) and complete contact information for all authors, including mailing addresses, e-mail addresses, phone. The title page is submitted as a document separate from the anonymous manuscript file to protect blind review.
• There is NO abstract associated with your submission (put “none” in the “Abstract” box in the submission system).
• The text of your submission (not including title page, tables, figures, and references) is no longer than 3500 words total.
• Your submission contains few and only necessary footnotes/endnotes.
• Any prior publication of the data featured in the manuscript is explicitly acknowledged either in the manuscript or in the transmittal letter to the editor. Any under review, forthcoming or "in press" articles which use the data should be forwarded to the editor with the submission.
• Your manuscript is written in such a way that the content is accessible to a wide audience of management scholars, including Ph.D. students. Given the short length of these articles, we expect these to be discrete and focused (e.g., explaining why and when omega is superior to alpha reliability, not reliabilities in general). The purpose is not to provide a complex, mathematical/technical overview, but rather to share materials, experiences, and novel ideas.
• GOMethods manuscripts meet one or more of the following goals as meaningful/relevant to management research: (1) introduce and/or explain (a new) research, analytical, or procedural tool/method, (2) describe a problem with and solution to existing (common) research, analytical, or procedural tool /method, and/or (3) advocate for (a new) research, analytical, or procedural tool/method with the goal of raising author, reviewer, and editor awareness of the topic and/or challenge prevailing views.
• For GOMethods manuscripts, data can come from anywhere except MTurk, TurkPrime, or CloudResearch (see Peer et al., 2022).
• GOMeasures manuscripts meet one or more of the following goals outlined in ARTICLE: (1) revision of an existing problematic measure, (2) meaningfully shortening a lengthy measure, and/or (3) introduction of a new measure of an existing established construct (new constructs will require a longer manuscript than GOMethods permits; these are welcome as a regular manuscript type submission).
• For GOMeausures manuscripts, data can come from anywhere except MTurk, TurkPrime, or CloudResearch (see Peer et al., 2022). Additional non-student/non-panel data (e.g., organization sample, objective data) are required to establish criterion validity.
• Online supplements are optional (and in some cases will be encouraged or required by the editor). Include these in the body of the manuscript as an Online Appendix.
• Programming/statistical code, output, and examples encouraged when relevant. Videos, images, datasets, podcasts, and other media are also encouraged when relevant. Please also review the GOM Data Sharing Policy.
• Declaration of generative AI in scientific writing 
  The below guidance only refers to the writing process, and not to the use of AI tools to analyze and draw insights from data as part of the research process. Where authors use generative artificial intelligence (AI) and AI-assisted technologies in the writing process, authors should only use these technologies to improve readability and language. Applying the technology should be done with human oversight and control, and authors should carefully review and edit the result, as AI can generate authoritative-sounding output that can be incorrect, incomplete or biased. AI and AI-assisted technologies should not be listed as an author or co-author, or be cited as an author. Authorship implies responsibilities and tasks that can only be attributed to and performed by humans. Authors should disclose in their manuscript the use of AI and AI-assisted technologies in the writing process by following the instructions below. A statement will appear in the published work. Please note that authors are ultimately responsible and accountable
• Statement: During the preparation of this work, the author(s) used [NAME TOOL / SERVICE] in order to [REASON]. After using this tool/service, the author(s) reviewed and edited the content as needed and take(s) full responsibility for the content of the publication.

This declaration does not apply to the use of basic tools for checking grammar, spelling, references etc. If there is nothing to disclose, there is no need to add a statement.

GOMeasures papers should adhere to the following structure:

Since this manuscript approach is a bit different from traditional ones, we wanted to provide authors some additional guidance. Below is a rough outline of how to structure your manuscript.

1. Introduction (construct focused): What is the definition of the construct? Why is what the measure is measuring important? What is the value of the construct to the field from a theoretical and practical sense?
2. Justification (measure focused): Why does revisiting an existing measure make sense? Please do not call out specific scholars for failing to do or report aspects of measure development, especially when those were not/may not have been commonplace or even in existence at the time. Rather, given the measure, when and how it was created, with what we have learned now and any changing social realities, what aspects/methods can/should be applied in revisiting the instrument. When justifying the need for a revised measure, consider the following questions:
1. Are aspects of the content domain missing or over/under emphasized (perhaps because of overreliance on factor analytic techniques and/or evolution of the construct definition and/or associated phenomenon)?
2. Is the measure contaminated with antecedents and outcomes of the construct?
3. Are there unnecessary or theoretically inappropriate negatively worded items?
4. Are there too many overly redundant items?
5. Are items prone to misunderstanding?
6. Are the psychometrics poor or borderline? (e.g., Pathki et al. [2022] demonstrate the poor psychometrics of the IPIP big five personality measure.)
7. Is the measure simply too long for most management research? Of course, this is somewhat subjective and depends on the construct.
8. This may not be an exhaustive list.
3. Methods & Results: Briefly, report what you did (that is summarize the studies and refer to online supplement). Overall Results: List the revised instrument items. Provide comparative construct, convergent, discriminate, and criterion validity. Demonstrate that the new measure is in fact meaningfully superior to those common and extant.
4. Provide an online supplement documenting the various studies used to revise/create the measure. Manuscripts must be methodologically sound for when someone "looks under the hood." For example, here is where you can include details about samples, item construction/adjustment, full correlation tables and factor analyses. Just because you do not include these things in the manuscript doesn't mean they haven't been done (indeed, they must be done to develop or revise a sound measure). Therefore, please include full methods/results sections as supplemental material. These sections should look like traditional Methods/Results sections. This will help hasten the review process and help interested readers process the supplemental materials quickly after publication. These sections will be published online so that readers can go a bit deeper if they choose, supporting and not distracting from the core contribution – the improved measure itself.
5. Discussion:
1. Strengths and weaknesses of the design/process.
2. Discuss potential work that may be necessary in the future (e.g., a diversity measure may point out that while in the USA, the present term is “disability,” this word may not be the legal term in the future; an idiosyncratic deals measure may need “allows me to use generative AI in my work” where such is not generally acceptable; a measure of commute duration and difficulty may be rendered moot by future general adoption of self-driving cars). This section provides authors an opportunity to point out social, technical, or other reasons why revisiting the measure in the future might be warranted. Are there implicit assumptions in the measure that might be invalid assumptions in the future?
6. Do NOT include these common/usual components of an academic management article:
1. lengthy theory
2. hypotheses
3. refrain from generic theoretical, research, and practical implications and future research (e.g., organizations and scholars will benefit from employing this new measure…)
4. conclusion (the article will be short enough and most would read “we hope this revised scale…”)

The SAGE Handbook of Survey Development and Application (2023) offers guidelines and example scale developments.

Commentaries

Purpose:

The goal of the focal article-commentary format is to advance the field by providing a forum for varying perspectives on the topic under consideration. A commentary may be:

1. a critical challenge to one or more aspects of the focal article, arguing for a position other than that taken in the focal article; 
2. an elaboration or extension of the position taken in the focal article, basically sympathetic to the position taken in the focal article, but pushing the argument further;
3. an application of a theoretical perspective that sheds light on the issues addressed in the focal article
4. a reflection on the writer’s experiences in applying the issues addressed in the focal article in particular organizational settings;
5. a comment on applicability of the issues raised in the focal article to other settings, or to other cultures;
6. a comment with a focus other than those listed above.

Length:

We envision comments as one to five journal pages in length, which sets 10 manuscript pages as a rough upper limit. Based on experience to date, most commentaries should require less than 10 pages. In the interests of including as a wide a range of perspectives as possible, the editor will place a great premium on tight and concise writing. A tightly argued 3-5 page commentary is likely to be better received than a meandering 10 page commentary.

Style Guidelines:

1. Do not summarize the focal article. Assume the reader has just read the focal article and say four other commentaries before getting to yours. Move directly to identifying the key issues you want to raise (e.g., “X overlooked two key issues,” or “We explore further the implications of X’s conclusion about issue Y”). Of course you may restate the specific issue that you are addressing. But there’s no need to say “X addresses A, B, and C; in this commentary we focus on C”.
2. Do not include general praise for the focal article (“X has done the field a great service by summarizing this literature,” or “There is much to admire in X’s article, namely, A, B, and C”). There is a tendency for commentators to want to start with a paragraph or two of general praise before getting down to business. Across multiple commentaries this takes up a lot of space. 
3. Use only essential citations. There are stylistic differences in scientific writing; some like to cite extensively; others less so. For commentary purposes, cite only works absolutely essential to support your point. Going as light as possible on references provides more space for commentaries.
4. Use a short title that emphasizes your key message and start your title with “A commentary on X” .
5. Do not include an abstract.
6. Make sure there is full author info (name, affiliation, address, phone, email) for all authors. This information should be added to Manuscript Central during submission, not included in the uploaded paper, unless it is in the form of a title page. Authors must be individuals (e.g., a paper cannot be listed as authored by “the XYZ Group”). 

Review:

Commentaries will be peer reviewed; it is expected that some will be accepted and some rejected. Criteria for acceptance include clarity and coherence of the position espoused, technical soundness, and reviewer judgment as to the degree to which the commentary contributes to greater insight and understanding of the topic. 

One point of note is that a small set of reviewers read and evaluates all commentaries. Reviewers need to compare commentaries for issues of redundancy and to make evaluations of relative merit (e.g., given journal page constraints, which commentaries are strongest?). Given these demands on reviewers, the level of detail of reviewer comments will typically be far less than that received for typical journal submission. 

One issue meriting special attention is redundancy. It is possible that two authors may submit highly similar commentaries. This creates difficulties, as both may be of high quality. We will use a variety of strategies in such a circumstance. These include editing one section of a broad commentary to eliminate the section redundant with another commentary, and working with the authors to pool their efforts and produce a joint commentary.

Tone:

While a commentary may be critical of a focal article, it is important to maintain a respectful tone that is critical of ideas, not of authors.

Timing:

There is a relatively short time window for the preparation of commentaries; this may be as short as 30 days but on average will be 90 days. This is driven by journal production schedules.

Queries for the Editor:

Authors should feel free to correspond with the editor prior to submitting a commentary if there are questions about any aspect of the commentary process. Authors may prepare a brief outline of the key points they want to make in the commentary and send it to the editor. While not in a position to commit to a commentary prior to peer review, the editor can comment on whether other commentaries have been submitted or proposed making the same points. 

Submission:

Submissions should be made via the portal of ScholarOne, which can be found on our journal’s homepage: https://journals.sagepub.com/author-instructions/GOM

Please contact Editor Yannick Griep via e-mail (yannick.griep@ru.nl) with any questions.

Please see here for the current focal articles: 
https://journals.sagepub.com/page/gom/commentaries

As part of the submission process you will need to confirm that this is your original work, that you have the rights in the work, that this is for first publication in this Journal, that it is not being considered for/has not already been published elsewhere, and that you have obtained and can supply all necessary permissions for the reproduction of any copyright works not owned by you.

Please see our guidelines on prior publication and note that the journal may accept submissions of manuscripts that have been posted on preprint servers.

Submission site

Submit your manuscript online via Sage Track.

IMPORTANT: Please check whether you already have an account in Sage Track 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.

Manuscripts should only be submitted with the consent of all contributing authors. The individual responsible for submitting the manuscript should carefully check that all those whose work contributed to the manuscript are listed as authors.

Ensure you upload all relevant manuscript files, including any additional supplemental files (including reporting guidelines where relevant).

Authorship

Please view our authorship policies, which includes information on criteria for authorship, who should be the corresponding author and more.

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.

Files

• To help the Editor in their preliminary evaluation, please indicate why you think the manuscript suitable for publication.
• Title Page with all required identifying information as laid out in Preparing your manuscript for submission (above). This will not be sent to the peer reviewers.
• Your manuscript, properly formatted and anonymized according to all stipulations above, and within the scope of the journal. Any information that compromises the anonymity of the author(s) should be removed or anonymized and included on the Title Page instead. See above for more information on anonymization. This version will be sent to the peer reviewers.
• Figures and images.
• All figures must be numbered consecutively in the order in which they appear in the text – they will appear in the published article in the order they are numbered.
• Figure resolution is 300dpi. More information on figure/image preparation can be found here.
• Supplemental material. This journal can host additional materials online (e.g. datasets, podcasts, videos, images, etc) alongside the full-text of the article. Your supplemental material must be one of our accepted file types. For that list and more information please refer to our guidelines on submitting supplemental files.

• Complete list of authors, with their institutional affiliations.
• The author information you enter at submission must exactly match what is included on your manuscript and/or title page, including full names, academic affiliations, and corresponding author contact details.
• The listed affiliation 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 note at the end of the manuscript.
• All listed authors must meet the criteria for authorship (above).
• All persons eligible for authorship must be included at the time of submission.
• All authors must have given consent for the manuscript to be submitted in its current form.
• Keywords: During submission, you may be asked to select or enter keywords for your manuscript. These keywords are used to match appropriate reviewers to your manuscript.
• The number of figures, tables, and words in your manuscript.
• Funder information: Name, grant/award number.
• You may be required to enter your declaration of conflicting interest as part of the submission process, in addition to listing it on your manuscript and/or title page. Please have it on hand.

• If you have posted your manuscript to a preprint server, you will be asked to supply the DOI (this does not prohibit submission, but no changes should be made to the preprint version while your manuscript is under evaluation in this journal). Please see our guidelines on prior publication. If the article is accepted for publication, the author may re-use their work according to the journal's author archiving policy. If your manuscript is accepted, you must include a link in your preprint to the final version of your published article.

The following summary describes the peer review process for this journal:
Identity transparency: Double Anonymized
Reviewer interacts with: Editor
Review information published: None

Your manuscript will undergo an initial evaluation. If it does not conform to the requirements laid out in these guidelines, it will be returned to you for amendments prior to peer review. Manuscripts may be desk rejected without peer review at this point if they are out of scope for the journal or otherwise unsuitable.

After passing the initial evaluation, your manuscript will then be peer reviewed. You can log in at any time to check the status of your manuscript. We will notify you when a decision has been reached.

GOM adheres to a rigorous double-anonymized reviewing policy in which the identity of both the reviewer and author are always concealed from both parties

To ensure the integrity of the peer review process we assign reviewers and cannot accept author recommendations.

All manuscripts are reviewed as rapidly as possible, while maintaining rigor. Reviewers make comments to the author and recommendations to the Editor who then makes the final decision on all manuscripts, including those appearing in a special issue or special collection. 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.

The journal has an Editorial Board and Editorial Review Board who serve the journal as external peer reviewers. Each member of the Editorial Review Board and Editorial Board are active researchers in the field and selected based on strict criteria, ensuring they possess the necessary expertise and experience. The Editor(s) may use one Editorial Review Board member or Editorial Board Member as a reviewer for each manuscript, and will then reach beyond this pool to include additional reviewers to meet the required number before a decision can be made. This ensures a comprehensive and robust peer review process, aligning with our commitment to publish the most credible and valid research. Care is taken not to invite any Editorial Review Board Member or Editorial Board Member that has any potential conflict of interest with any author of the paper.

Read Sage's complete peer review policy.

Plagiarism

The journal and Sage take issues of copyright infringement, plagiarism or other breaches of best practice in publication very seriously. Please read Sage's complete policy on plagiarism and the actions we may take.

Contributor’s Publishing Agreement

Before publication, we require 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 Journal Author Gateway.

Preprints

If your manuscript was posted on a preprint server prior to acceptance, you must include a link in your preprint to the final published version of your published article.

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 should be returned promptly to avoid delaying publication. 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. This is the final opportunity to make changes to your manuscript. Further corrections will not be possible after publication. Changes to the author list are not permitted at this stage.

Publication

OnlineFirst publication: This enables us to publish final articles online immediately, without waiting for assignment to a future issue of the Journal. This usually significantly reduces publication lead time. Visit the Sage Journals help page for more details, including how to cite OnlineFirst articles.

Access to your published article: We provide you with online access to your published article. The online access link is provided to the corresponding author for sharing with their co-authors.

Promoting your article

Publication is not the end of the process. Between us, we can ensure that your article is found, read, downloaded and cited as widely as possible. Many of the most effective tactics are those you can do quickly and easily to your network of contacts and peers. Visit the Promote Your Article page on the Sage Journal Author Gateway for numerous resources to help you promote your work.

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

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

You can view our complaints and appeals procedure.