Journal of Contract Management Editorial Policy
The National Contract Management Association (NCMA) publishes the Journal of Contract Management (JCM) on an annual basis. The draft of the policies outlined below help define the mission, content, and method by which authors will be published for future issues of the JCM.
Positioning and Scope
JCM is positioned as a broad-based journal devoted to the dissemination of research in the substantive domain of contract management. Its editorial scope spans a wide-range of topics in the field. JCM’s editorial policy favors no particular topic-area, research paradigm, or analytical approach. It strives to comprehensively cover the contract management discipline by publishing conceptual, empirical, and practical application manuscripts that demonstrate substantial conceptual development, appropriate methodology, proven best practices, and value-added topic areas.
JCM is an outlet for publication of both full-length manuscripts and research notes. In some instances, manuscripts that are initially submitted for consideration as full-length manuscripts are accepted for publication as research notes. Manuscripts that meet the standards for publication in JCM but whose potential contribution (in the assessment of the editor and reviewers) is of limited scope fall in this category. In other instances, authors may choose to submit their manuscript as research notes for publication consideration in JCM.
Examples in this category include replication studies and manuscripts that primarily comment on manuscripts previously published in JCM. JCM is not an appropriate outlet for manuscripts whose sole contribution is to acknowledge contracts/procurement research methodology, measurement, and/or modeling issues. Rather, the methodological, measurement, and modeling aspects of manuscripts published in JCM should serve to support their contribution to marketing knowledge in a substantive area.
Review Process and Policies
The procedures guiding the selection of manuscripts for publication in JCM are similar to those at most other refereed journals. Manuscripts are accepted for publication only after they are evaluated by at least two reviewers who are either members of the editorial review board or ad-hoc reviewers. Periodically, the substantive, theoretical, and/or methodological aspects of a submitted manuscript might require the editor to rely exclusively on ad-hoc reviewers to process a manuscript.
JCM employs a double-blind review process. The author's name and credentials are removed prior to forwarding a manuscript to reviewers in order to maximize objectivity and ensure that the manuscript is judged solely on the basis of its content and contribution to the field. To ensure anonymity and accuracy, the manuscript will be assigned an identification number. Any commissioned manuscript or invited commentary published in JCM without going through the process of a double-blind review is explicitly identified as such.
The evaluations and recommendations of qualified and knowledgeable reviewers very heavily influence the decision of the editor and/or the functional director on whether or not to accept a manuscript for publication in JCM. The reviewers are acknowledged experts in one or more domains of the manuscript; substantive, theoretical, and methodological. Authors are welcome to suggest potential reviewers for their manuscript. While due consideration will be given to author’s suggestions, this should not be construed as an assurance that one or more of the reviewers assigned to a manuscript may be chosen from among the list of reviewers suggested by the author.
The reviewers for JCM are encouraged to adopt a developmental perspective in their comments to the authors. Each reviewer will complete a standard criteria review sheet. If you are interested in becoming a reviewer for the JCM, please send a letter of inquiry and your credentials to Kerry McKinnon, Managing Editor, at firstname.lastname@example.org.
Manuscript Evaluation Criteria
Manuscripts submitted for publication consideration in JCM are judged on the basis of their potential contribution to the advancement of the science and/or practice of contract management. JCM will maintain a long-standing tradition of publishing manuscripts that:
- Address “leading-edge” issues,
- Build upon the existing literature base,
- Contain high quality and thought-provoking information and theories,
- Challenge or shift dominant conceptual and methodological paradigms,
- Attempt to change perspectives and/or cause a phenomenon to be viewed in a different light, and
- Extend the boundaries of the discipline.
At the most fundamental level, a JCM manuscript must meet the following criteria:
- Focus on a substantive issue in the domain of contract management;
- Demonstrate conceptual rigor; and
- Provide evidence of methodological rigor, if an empirical piece.
Authors of empirical studies accepted for publication in JCM are required to report methodological information (e.g., sampling frame, scale reliabilities, and sample size) and results (e.g., correlations among variables and size of effects, in terms of beta coefficients or elasticities along with standard error) in a manner that would enable future researchers to use the study in subsequent meta-analytic studies.