Extended Abstracts Papers and Review Process

An extended abstract is a scholarly presentation summary which consists of a short description (3 to 5 pages). It is intended to establish if research question(s)is pertinent to the MESD’2012 conference. The extended abstract must include: title, authors (in a separate page), key question, main hypotheses, problem, state-of-the art, methods used (if applicable), main findings, and some core references. Please bear in mind that submitted extended abstracts need to be uploaded as prescribed in the website without author information as the reviewers will be directly downloading these submissions for evaluation in the double-blind review process. Extended abstracts are submitted to the peer-review process and its approval means the paper has been accepted for presentation at the conference. You have to follow the regular submission process. Extended abstracts should be sent before the deadline. After the review process of the extended abstract, the authors will be asked to prepare and submit the final paper.

In addition to extended abstracts, authors and scholars who are already working under these broad areas are encouraged to submit their working/full papers. The submissions under these categories would subject to the same double-blind review process and deadlines as given above.
A double-blind peer-review process is applied to ensure that evaluations are as error-free as possible and of the highest possible caliber. Before undergoing peer review, papers will be checked for compliance with submission guidelines and for overall appropriateness for the conference. Papers that pass the initial screening process will then be double-blind reviewed. The Program Co-Chairs reserve the right to shift a submission from one track to another as they deem appropriate. Reviewers should provide constructive feedback and make suggestions to authors in order to improve the quality of the paper. The authors’ identities are not known to the reviewers. The research papers will be evaluated according to the following criteria: relevance to selected research conference topics; clear definition of the core issue; mastery of the concepts used; theoretical and methodological contribution; advancement of the research agenda; usefulness to management practices; depth of the analyses and arguments; validity and consistency of the discussions; quality of the literature review; readability of the text; conformity with submission guidelines.