•  
  •  
 

Submission Guidelines

The MPJBT welcomes manuscripts in the areas of business as well as on technologies as they relate to business such as, but not limited to, enhancing productivity, efficiency, or effectiveness in core business areas. Submissions related to pedagogy in these fields are also encouraged. Empirical research papers, theoretical and conceptual manuscripts, case studies, and notes from the field will be considered for peer review.

Submissions are accepted any time during the year and must meet the following requirements:

  • Submission Platform: All manuscripts must be submitted electronically via MPJBT OpenSPACES.
  • Original Work: Submitted manuscripts must be original works that have not been previously published and are not currently under review elsewhere. By submitting, authors affirm and warrant that these conditions are met.
  • Formatting Style: Manuscripts must adhere to the most current APA style guidelines (APA Style, 7th ed. American Psychological Association, 2020. https://apastyle.apa.org).
  • Abstract: Include an abstract of 150–200 words.
  • Keywords: Include 3 to 5 keywords.
  • Document Format:
    • Submit manuscripts in Microsoft Word format (.docx).
    • Use 12-point Aptos or Helvatica font, double spacing, and one-inch margins on all sides.
    • Remove all identifying author information from the manuscript.
    • To ensure anonymity, use Word’s “File” > “Info” > “Inspect Document” > “Remove all document properties and personal information” feature.
    • All figures and tables should be embedded within the manuscript, numbered sequentially (e.g., Figure 1, Table 1), and include descriptive titles.
    • Use APA Style (7th edition) for all citations and references, as outlined by the American Psychological Association, 7th ed. (2020): https://apastyle.apa.org
  • Length: Manuscripts should not exceed 30 pages, including references, tables, and appendices. In very rare cases, submissions longer than 30 pages may be considered if discussed with the editor in advance.
  • Line Numbers: Please include line numbers to assist in the review process. They can be enabled in Word under "Layout".
  • Copyright: Authors are responsible for obtaining permission for any copyrighted materials.

Review Process

Submissions that comply with the above guidelines will undergo an initial editorial review. Manuscripts may be subject to desk rejection if they:

  • Fall outside the scope of MPJBT
  • Are incomplete or improperly formatted
  • Do not meet basic quality standards

Qualified submissions are reviewed by at least two reviewers through a double-blind peer-review process. Authors can expect an editorial decision within approximately 60 days of submission.

If revisions are requested:

  • Authors have 60 days to submit major revisions
  • Authors have 30 days to submit minor revisions
  • Late revisions may result in the manuscript being withdrawn from consideration.

Explanations

  • Note from the field: A Note from the Field is a shorter submission, limited to 15 pages, that presents original work subjected to full peer review and held to the same standards of rigor as full-length manuscripts. Despite its brevity, this format is well suited for focused, early-stage, or exploratory research that advances emerging or underdeveloped areas of business or technology. Submissions may include empirical studies or qualitative research.
    Note from the field may be:
    • Academic insights from field experiences
    • Empirical studies with preliminary findings from industry experiences
    • Conceptual pieces that extend, refine, or challenge existing theories
    • Proposals for new research directions or questions
    • Critical evaluations of current theoretical frameworks or literature reviews
    • Insights into applications in business
    Regardless of form, all research notes should make a clear and meaningful contribution to ongoing scholarly conversations.
  • Case studies:[1] Case studies are in-depth, contextual analyses of real-world business scenarios, organizations, challenges, or decisions. They aim to illustrate principles, provoke critical thinking, and offer insights into business practices, strategies, technologies, or environments.
    • Fictional or hypothetical scenarios are not accepted.
    • The case must include a protagonist.
    • The case must have been classroom tested.
    • The Case must have:
      • Context: A clear setting (organization, market, time frame) that allows readers to understand the situation and relevant dynamics.
      • Defined Problem or Opportunity: A specific challenge, decision point, or opportunity that requires analysis.
      • Stakeholder Perspective: Key actors involved—decision-makers, teams, clients, competitors—with their motivations and constraints.
      • Data-Rich Narrative: Qualitative and/or quantitative data that supports the analysis (can be real or simulated for educational use).
      • Analysis and Implications: Insights into strategy, leadership, operations, finance, marketing, etc., and broader lessons for practice or theory.
      • Pedagogical Value: Often designed to be used in teaching, with discussion prompts, learning objectives, or instructor guidance.
    • Must be accompanied by a teaching note.
      • Teaching note instructions:
        • Overview: Provide a summary of the case/incident (max 150 words), followed by a sentence specifying applicable course(s) and level (e.g., undergraduate or graduate courses in tax, real estate, marketing research, strategic management, etc.).
        • Research Methods: State whether the case/incident is descriptive or decision-based. Describe data collection methods (e.g., primary interviews or secondary sources) and note whether the case is disguised.
        • AI Statement: If AI tools were used in writing the case/incident or teaching note, explain how they were used and cite all AI-generated content in APA format. If not used, clearly state that no AI tools were involved.
          • Using AI platforms to assist with tasks like organizing ideas or refining your writing is acceptable and there is no need to cite the tool.
        • Learning Outcomes: Define 3–7 outcomes, aligning each with corresponding discussion questions. Outcomes should describe what students will be able to do after completing the case/incident, using Bloom’s taxonomy (e.g., Identify, Analyze, Evaluate, Synthesize, Recommend).
        • Discussion Questions: Provide discussion questions linked to each learning outcome. Questions should be grounded in theory and supported by relevant citations. All questions must be answerable based on case content.
        • Answers to Questions: Restate each question and provide a model answer that reflects “A-level” student performance. Answers should incorporate theoretical insights and may include instructor notes. Supporting materials (e.g., handouts or theory summaries) may be included in an appendix.
        • General Discussion: Include a teaching plan and recommended readings. Offer guidance on how to use the case in class, including theories or concepts students should understand to analyze it effectively. Identify additional student resources and note any revisions made after classroom testing, which is required for publication in Business Case Journal.
        • Epilogue: Briefly describe what actions were taken by the organization and the outcomes since the time of the case/incident.
        • Other Pedagogical Materials: List any additional resources or materials that may benefit instructors or support further learning.

[1]These criteria are adapted from guidelines provided by the Society for Case Research.