What kinds of proposals are a good fit for ANNALS?

Proposals that are a good fit for ANNALS describe an extensive and integrative review of management literature that identifies some themes, patterns, or insights not evident from a cursory reading of the literature, and that enhance understanding of the topic of the review. These themes, patterns, or insights should also suggest directions for future research that would broaden the impact and reach of the literature. Proposals should be grounded in work already completed on the review, rather than describe work that will be done in the future.

First, a good proposal articulates a focus for the review and a problem that the review solves, explaining why it is important to solve that problem. There should be a significant supply of published empirical and theoretical research on the topic (approximately 150–500 articles, with some variance in this amount depending on the topic). In addition, the proposal should identify any reviews in the same or similar areas published in the last 10–15 years, and clearly articulate how the proposed review would differ from these extant reviews. Merely pointing out that a review of the literature has not been performed (or not performed for a number of years) is not sufficient justification for a proposal’s acceptance. The proposal must specify the procedure used for the review, including how articles were identified, screened, and analyzed, as well as criteria for inclusion and exclusion. Finally, the proposal should outline insights that emerged from the review and provide a sense of implications for future research.