PROCEDURE AND CRITERIA FOR SELECTING BEST PAPERS AND

BEST REVIEWERS

Chan Hahn Best Paper Award

Procedure:

1. The Program Chair identifies several of the best regular papers accepted based on the
reviewers’ comments as well as his/her own reading of the papers. Both conceptual and
empirical papers are considered for the award;
2. The Program Chair sends those to the Division Chair-elect, the Division Chair, and the
Past Division Chair;
3. After receiving their feedback, the Program Chair decides which paper will receive the
Chan Hahn Best Paper Award;
4. The rest of the papers can be recognized as finalists both in the Meeting Program and the
OM Division Business Meeting.

Criteria:

1. Significance of the paper to the field of Operations Management (OM);

2. The extent to which the paper is interesting;
3. Theoretical contribution to OM;
4. Use of appropriate methodological rigor;
5. Clarity of writing and/or presentation.

Best Student Paper Award:

Procedure:

1. The Program Chair identifies several of the best student papers accepted based on the
reviewers’ comments as well as his/her own reading of the papers. Both conceptual and
empirical papers are considered for the award;
2. The Program Chair sends those to the Division Chair-elect, the Division Chair, and the
Past Division Chair;
3. After receiving their feedback, The Program Chair decides which paper will receive the
Best Student Paper Award.
4. The rest of the papers can be recognized as finalists both in the Meeting Program and the
OM Division Business Meeting.

Criteria:

1. Student papers should be authored solely by students;

2. Significance of the paper to the field of Operations Management (OM);
3. Extent to which the paper is interesting;
4. Theoretical contribution to OM;
5. Use of appropriate methodological rigor;
6. Clarity of writing and/or presentation.
Best Reviewer Awards:
Procedure:

1. The OM division each year offers three “Best Reviewer Award” at the annual meeting to
recognize and encourage reviewers.
2. The Program Chair has the autonomy to select the best reviewers based on the criteria
developed by the Division.

Criteria:

1. Usefulness and accuracy of the review (Usefulness);

2. Depth and scope of the review, i.e. not length, but rather coverage;
3. Timeliness of the review;
4. The extent to which the review is constructive (Tone);
5. The submitter’s average feedback to the usefulness and tone of the reviewer.