Introduction & Front-End

Grant, A. M., & Pollock, T. G. (2011). Publishing in AMJ—Part 3: Setting the hook. Academy of Management Journal, 54(5), 873-879.
This is a great paper to help you start your paper off with a bang. It covers the basics as well as providing specific example ideas. Click here to go to the paper.

Lange, D., & Pfarrer, M. D. (2017). Editors’ comments: Sense and structure—The core building blocks of an AMR article. Academy of Management Review, 42(3), 407-416.
This is one of the best articles to help you write your introduction & abstract. The 5 C's are a great approach to helping you find, frame and structure your contribution so that it's clear for all to see. Click here to go to the paper.

What is Your Contribution?

Davis, M. S. (1971). That's interesting! Towards a phenomenology of sociology and a sociology of phenomenology. Philosophy of the social sciences, 1(2), 309-344.
Another classic read. This paper identifies a key mechanism to frame your work so that the contribution is highlighted. Click here to go to the paper.

Bartunek, J. M., Rynes, S. L., & Ireland, R. D. (2006). What makes management research interesting, and why does it matter?. Academy of Management Journal, 49(1), 9-15.
This paper looks into the characteristics of "interesting" research in our field and shows that there are a number of elements that go into making a great paper - great things to frame and highlight in your own work. Click here to go to the paper.

Hideg, I., DeCelles, K. A., & Tihanyi, L. (2020). From the editors: Publishing practical and responsible research in AMJ. Academy of Management Journal, 63(6), 1681-1686.
We can sometimes lose sight of the main reason we are doing the research. This is a great piece to get you thinking about the meaning of your research. Click here to go to the paper.

Makadok, R., Burton, R., & Barney, J. (2018). A practical guide for making theory contributions in strategic management. Strategic Management Journal, 39(6), 1530-1545.
Not only a taxonomy for contribution types, but ideas on how to create a contribution. Click here to go to the paper.

Healey, M. P., Leroy, H., Post, C., & Potočnik, K. (2023). Changing the scholarly conversation: What it means, why it matters, and how to approach it in micro research. Journal of Management Studies, 60(6), 1633-1656.
Another great piece that categorises different types of contributions so that you can try and identify your own. Click here to go to the paper.

Locke, K., & Golden-Biddle, K. (1997). Constructing opportunities for contribution: Structuring intertextual coherence and “problematizing” in organizational studies. Academy of Management journal, 40(5), 1023-1062.
And yet another great piece looking at contribution. Phew, anybody would think that making a theoretical contribution was important! Definitely worth a read. Click here to go to the paper.

Theoretical Contribution

Sutton, R. I., & Staw, B. M. (1995). What theory is not. Administrative Science Quarterly, 40(3), 371-384.
A must-read article for anybody wanting to publish in top-tier journals in our field. Nailing your theoretical contribution is still hard, but at least knowing what you're looking for makes it a bit easier! Click here to go to the paper.

Weick, K. E. (1995). What theory is not, theorizing is. Administrative Science Quarterly, 40(3), 385-390.
If you're reading Sutton & Staw (which you should) then you also need to read Weick's take on it. This paper is great for putting theory into perspective and remembering that it's a process. Click here to go to the paper.

Di Maggio, P. J. (1995). What theory is not. Administrative Science Quarterly, 40(3), 391-397.
To wrap up the Sutton & Staw trilogy, you should read this paper. It highlights the social construction involved in theory-making and while it also emphasises the difficulties involved, it's good to help you remember the audience. Click here to go to the paper.

Theoretical Framework & Developing the Argument

Sparrowe, R. T., & Mayer, K. J. (2011). Publishing in AMJ—part 4: Grounding hypotheses. Academy of Management Journal, 54(6), 1098-1102.
Great ideas for how to make sure your hypothetico-deductive argument is clear, logical and coherent. Click here to go to the paper.

Mayer, K. J., & Sparrowe, R. T. (2013). Integrating theories in AMJ articles. Academy of Management Journal, 56(4), 917-922.
This paper provides guidance on how you can use multiple theories to develop your research questions without diluting their effect. Click here to go to the paper.

Shaw, J. D. (2017). Advantages of starting with theory. Academy of Management Journal, 60(3), 819-822.
If you're doing hypothetico-deductive research, this is a thought-provoking read. Although it focuses more on what not to do, it's a good reminder that design and planning is a must. Click here to go to the paper.

Writing the Method & Results

Methods checklist for JAP. This is a useful list to go through, regardless of where you are publishing, but particularly if you are using quantitative methods. Click here to go to the list.

Zhang, Y., & Shaw, J. D. (2012). Publishing in AMJ—Part 5: Crafting the methods and results. Academy of Management Journal, 55(1), 8-12.
Yet another classic in the AMJ series. More relevant to quants than quals, but the key message of completeness, clarity and credibility hold regardless. Click here to go to the paper.

Köhler, T. (2016). From the editors: On writing up qualitative research in management learning and education. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 15(3), 400-418.
Although this covers a range of aspects of writing qual research, it's particularly useful for writing up the methods & analysis. Click here to go to the paper.

Suddaby, R. (2006). From the editors: What grounded theory is not. Academy of Management Journal, 49(4), 633-642.
Oh, the problem of grounded theory! Such a great approach, but such a red flag for reviewers. Here's when and why it all started to go wrong. Click here to go to the paper.

Writing the Discussion

Geletkanycz, M., & Tepper, B. J. (2012). Publishing in AMJ–part 6: Discussing the implications. Academy of Management Journal, 55(2), 256-260.
One of the few papers that explicitly tackles the craft of writing a discussion and has some pointers to follow. Click here to go to the paper.

General Writing Issues for our Disciplines

Daft, R. L. (1985). Why I recommended that your manuscript be rejected and what you can do about it. Publishing in the Organizational Sciences, 193-209.
This book chapter is a classic for a reason - it covers the key issues that you need to check off before you submit your article. Ignore it at your peril! Click here to go to the chapter.

Shepherd, D. A., & Wiklund, J. (2020). Simple rules, templates, and heuristics! An attempt to deconstruct the craft of writing an entrepreneurship paper. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 44(3), 371-390.
For those of us working in entrepreneurship, this is a great starter paper (and good reminder) of tactics and techniques. Click here to go to the paper.

Pollock, T. G., & Bono, J. E. (2013). Being Scheherazade: The importance of storytelling in academic writing. Academy of Management Journal, 56(3), 629-634.
This is a great paper to read when you're in a slump - it helps to remind you of the fun you can have when writing. Click here to go to the paper.

Khatri, N., Varma, A., & Budhwar, P. (2017). Commonly observed shortcomings in manuscripts submitted to management journals. IIMB Management Review, 29(3), 203-209.
This covers the basics - what you definitely need to do before submitting anywhere. Click here to go to the paper.

Patriotta, G. (2017). Crafting papers for publication: Novelty and convention in academic writing. Journal of Management Studies, 54(5), 747-759.
This is a good paper to read if you're struggling to navigate between what you want to say and what you think the reviewers will expect from you; or if you're new to the publishing process. Click here to go to the paper.

"Special" Papers - Writing Qual, Review & Theory Journal Articles

Qualitative Research Papers

Bansal, P., & Corley, K. (2012). Publishing in AMJ—Part 7: What's different about qualitative research? Academy of Management Journal, 55(3), 509-513.
This takes the "traditional" quants AMJ paper as a starting point and examines how to think and write differently when you are doing qual research. Click here to go to the paper.

Pratt, M. G. (2008). Fitting oval pegs into round holes: Tensions in evaluating and publishing qualitative research in top-tier North American journals. Organizational Research Methods, 11(3), 481-509.
Highlights some of the difficulties involved with publishing qual research - forewarned is forearmed! Click here to go to the paper.

Cunliffe, A. L. (2011). Crafting qualitative research: Morgan and Smircich 30 years on. Organizational Research Methods, 14(4), 647-673.
A great overview of epistemological paradigms so you can situate your research more carefully. Click here to go to the paper.

Jonsen, K., Fendt, J., & Point, S. (2018). Convincing qualitative research: What constitutes persuasive writing?. Organizational Research Methods, 21(1), 30-67.
Once you've worked out what your storyline is, this is a great piece to help get around some of those qual ("oval") tensions. Click here to go to the paper.

Review Articles

Patriotta, G. (2020). Writing impactful review articles. Journal of Management Studies, 57(6), 1272-1276.
A good overview to help you find a purpose for your review. Click here to go to the paper.

Webster, J., & Watson, R. T. (2002). Analyzing the past to prepare for the future: Writing a literature review. MIS Quarterly, xiii-xxiii.
This is targeted at those of us working in IS, but has relevance to anybody across our disciplines as it covers a range of tactics for developing and writing a review piece. Click here to go to the paper.

Watson, R. T., & Webster, J. (2020). Analysing the past to prepare for the future: Writing a literature review a roadmap for release 2.0. Journal of Decision Systems, 29(3), 129-147.
A follow-up paper to their earlier piece with a bit more development on how to relate concepts. Click here to go to the paper.

Theory Papers

Cornelissen, J. (2017). Editor’s comments: Developing propositions, a process model, or a typology? Addressing the challenges of writing theory without a boilerplate. Academy of Management Review, 42(1), 1-9.
A good starting point to help you work out what type of "theory" paper you want to write. Click here to go to paper.

Fisher, G., Mayer, K., & Morris, S. (2021). From the editors—Phenomenon-based theorizing. Academy of Management Review, 46(4), 631-639.
If you're trying to unpack a new phenomenon, this is a great piece to help you structure your work. Click here to go to the paper.

Makadok, R. (2022). Guidance for AMR authors about making formal theory accessible. Academy of Management Review, 47(2), 193-205.
Some ideas to help nail down your theoretical ideas into something solid. Click here to go to the paper.

Thatcher, S. M., & Fisher, G. (2022). From the editors—The nuts and bolts of writing a theory paper: A practical guide to getting started. Academy of Management Review, 47(1), 1-8.
It does what it says on the tin! Some good steps to get you started turning your ideas into a theory piece. Click here to go to the paper.

If you spot a mistake, or know of other papers that you think deserve a spot in the repository, please get in touch and let me know!