Submissions

Login or Register to make a submission.

Author Guidelines

Authors are invited to make a submission to this journal. All submissions will be assessed by an editor to determine whether they meet the aims and scope of this journal. Those considered to be a good fit will be sent for peer review before determining whether they will be accepted or rejected.

Before making a submission, authors are responsible for obtaining permission to publish any material included with the submission, such as photos, documents and datasets. All authors identified on the submission must consent to be identified as an author. Where appropriate, research should be approved by an appropriate ethics committee in accordance with the legal requirements of the study's country.

An editor may desk reject a submission if it does not meet minimum standards of quality. Before submitting, please ensure that the study design and research argument are structured and articulated properly. The title should be concise and the abstract should be able to stand on its own. This will increase the likelihood of reviewers agreeing to review the paper. When you're satisfied that your submission meets this standard, please follow the checklist below to prepare your submission.

Submission Preparation Checklist

All submissions must meet the following requirements.

  • This submission meets the requirements outlined in the Author Guidelines. I have read and understood the Submission Guidelines of TMR.
  • This submission has not been previously published, nor is it before another journal for consideration.
  • All references have been checked for accuracy and completeness. Followed APA 7 Style Guide
  • All tables and figures have been numbered and labeled.
  • Permission has been obtained to publish all photos, datasets and other material provided with this submission.
  • The authors have disclosed where AI tools were applied in the manuscript and have provided Turnitin reports for both similarity and AI detection.
  • Yes, I understand that if these points are not met, it could result in a desk rejection.

Research Article

Section Policy

I/we have,
Identified the knowledge gap
By creating a contradiction through review of literature. From the directions for future research of a recent paper.
Listed unique contributions, first theoretical, followed by managerial 
Used theory (ies) to explain the phenomenon
Defined the context
Submitted
An empirical paper organized as per IMRaD structure (Introduction, Methods, Results, and Discussion)
A theoretical work with a conceptual framework that extended or built theory

Review Article

Section Policy

I/We have provided answer to the questions,
Why another review article when already so many reviews exist?
How does this article contribute? (Incorporated a Review of Reviews section)
Submitted a,
Hybrid Review
Systematic Literature Review
The review article shows directions for future research
Does not simply list studies without synthesis and without drawing insights

Research Article on Contemporary Issues

Section Policy

I/we have,
Identified the knowledge gap
By creating a contradiction through review of literature. From the directions for future research of a recent paper.
Listed unique contributions, first theoretical, followed by managerial 
Used theory (ies) to explain the phenomenon
Defined the context
Submitted
An empirical paper organized as per IMRaD structure (Introduction, Methods, Results, and Discussion)
A theoretical work with a conceptual framework that extended or built theory

Policy Perspectives of Practitioners

Section Policy

I/We have,
Described briefly the anomaly/problem observed at the implementation stage.
Provided evidences. 
Suggested a new perspective that has the power to change the current narrative. 
Compared the relative strength of the new perspective with the standard perspective. 
Not submitted an opiniated article.

Executive Perspectives

Section Policy

I/We have explained with the support of evidence the problem/challenges (Conceptual, practical, methodological etc.) we are facing and why it needs to be changed
Suggested a new perspective that has the power to change the current narrative
Compared the relative strength of the new perspective with the existing standard perspective
Not submitted an article full of opinions

Case Studies

Section Policy

I/We have explained with the support of evidence the problem/challenges (Conceptual, practical, methodological etc.) we are facing and why it needs to be changed
Suggested a new perspective that has the power to change the current narrative
Compared the relative strength of the new perspective with the existing standard perspective
Not submitted an article full of opinions

Teaching Cases with Notes

Section Policy

I/We submitted a teaching case that;
Is set in a contemporary context (not more than 3 years old)
Has a strong dilemma that demands urgent resolution
Has a protagonist
Has 3 to 4 options/alternatives for resolution
Submitted with a Teaching note
The 3 to 5 teaching objectives are based on at least one theory from a management course
Learning outcomes are mapped to Bloom’s Taxonomy 

Thesis Briefs

Section Policy

Awarded within past three years by a UGC recognised university or AICTE approved B-school
Stated topic, research questions, theory, methodology, findings, and contributions within 1200 words.
Not submitted full thesis

Book Reviews

Section Policy

Submitted a proposal NOT a review
Book was published in past two years
Author(s) should be of world class with affiliation of premier institution or organization

Privacy Statement

The names and email addresses entered in this journal site will be used exclusively for the stated purposes of this journal and will not be made available for any other purpose or to any other party.