Instructions for Reviewers

Please click here to download the instructions


As of January 31st 2017, once the EurOMA 2017 Conference Co-Chairs have allocated the eligible submitted abstracts to registered Reviewers, an automatic notification per abstract (including the PDF of the abstract as an attachment) will automatically be sent to each Reviewer via e-mail.

Completed reviews should be submitted by no later than Sunday, February 19, 2017.


  1. To access the EurOMA 2017 online review window, login to the E-PASS system using the information and links provided in the e-mail notification(s) delivered to your inbox.ATTENTION: If you experience problems logging in, please ensure that ‘Cookies’ are enabled in your browser. E-PASS uses Cookies to store login data and related information, as well as to verify that the user is allowed to access the EurOMA 2017 Reviewer windows and forms.
  2. You will need to login with your valid EurOMA 2017 Reviewer e-mail address & password. If you have forgotten or lost your password, please follow the online instructions to obtain a new one (which you are then able to change to one that is easier for you to remember).
  3. Once logged in, you will be directed to a window displaying a List of Submissions, with a row for each of the abstracts assigned to you for review. This table includes columns for:
    – ID
    – Title
    the icon
    – Empirical
    – Status
    – Review
  4. You may download the PDF version of the submitted document by clicking on the icon
  5. Once you have read the submission, you can begin the review process by clicking on the ‘Start Review’ link in the Review column. A separate window containing the EurOMA 2017 Reviewer Evaluation Form will display.
  6. Please read through the following information boxes carefully prior to completing the online Reviewer Evaluation Form:
Guidelines for Reviewers

The goal of the EurOMA review process is to recommend (or not) the inclusion of a paper in the conference programme, based on the submitted abstract. Having considered the reviews for each abstract, it is solely up to the Conference Co-chair(s) to make the final decisions regarding each abstract as well as on the conference programme.

There are three stages to the review process as reflected on the Evaluation Form:

  • The first stage evaluates the abstract according to the standard EurOMA criteria (described below) using the following scale:
    1=Poor | 2=Average | 3=Good | N/A=Not Applicable.
  • The second stage is recording your comments and suggestions on the abstract. The textbox for ‘Suggestions to the Author’ enables you to provide constructive qualitative feedback to the author(s) regarding the strengths and weaknesses of the abstract. Please give specific reasons where and why the abstract is strong or weak, avoiding any unsupported criticism or commentary. The ‘Comments to the Organisers’ textbox allows you to separately and confidentially record any internal remarks related to the abstract; only the organisers will be able to see these.

The third stage is recommending whether or not the abstract should be accepted for the Conference. You may select one of the following three possibilities:

Reviewer’s recommendation:
Conditionally Accept (1)
Reject (2)

(1) The authors may be invited to submit a full paper which should carefully consider the reviewer’s feedback. Therefore, it is important that the reviewer provide clear and precise recommendations in the “Suggestions to the Author(s)” box.

(2) The main reason(s) for rejection should be briefly stated in the “Suggestions to the Author(s)” box.

Evaluating the Abstract

The objective of the Conference Abstract is to anticipate the presentation of research that may or may not be polished sufficiently for a journal publication, yet presents a potential for making a significant contribution to the Conference Theme and to the greater field of Operations Management.

Each abstract should have the following structure:

  1. Purpose: Theoretical background, managerial problem and research questions, objectives and/or hypotheses.
  2. Design/methodology/approach: How are the objectives achieved? Describe the main data and data sources as well as methods of data collection, analysis and validation.
  3. Findings: Presentation and discussion of achieved or expected results.

4. Relevance/contribution: Highlight the achieved or expected contribution to the theory, practice, methodology and/or teaching of OM.

Abstracts should be evaluated against the following criteria:

  • Topic suitability – The proposed paper fits well into the scope of the theme or topic to which it was submitted
  • Research questions/objectives/hypotheses – The research questions / objectives/hypotheses are stated clearly
  • Theoretical background – The proposed paper relates appropriately to what has already been written in the field, and the relevant literature is recognized adequately
  • Empirical background – The proposed paper is based on a managerial problem and/or grounded on empirical data
  • Methodology – The research demonstrates rigor in the application of appropriate research methods, data collection, analysis and validation
  • Presentation and discussion of results (achieved or expected) – The (expected) findings are clearly presented, and aligned with the stated research questions/objectives
  • Contribution to OM theory, practice, methodology and/or teaching – The proposed paper promises to make a significant contribution to the field and is the contribution clear

The basic demonstration of appropriate theory development applies to all abstracts. Acceptable abstracts should provide not only a new explanation for a phenomenon but also undertake an empirical exploration.

Purely conceptual abstracts whose contribution consists in synthesizing existing theories and/or proposing new explanations of an Operations Management phenomenon without testing empirically these explanations are unlikely to be accepted.

Please remember to be constructively critical, since (mostly) you are reviewing research in progress, not final papers!! Also take into consideration that the author(s) may have access to your review and comments.

Your recommendation to accept or to reject an abstract for the Conference should take into account the above criteria, including, at the margin, the prospect of the presentation at the Conference to stimulate debate among the participants and to give impetus for additional research in this area.


  1. ‘Save’ Button: Allows you to save your draft evaluation and to return back to it (as many times as you like) should you wish to fine-tune or make modifications to the review form.
  2. ‘Save & Submit’ Button: After having completed your review, please click ‘Save & Submit’. You should soon see the pop-up system message
    “Thank you for your review. It has been successfully saved and submitted.”

ATTENTION: Once you have clicked on the ‘Save & Submit’ button, you are no longer able to return to and/or modify the Evaluation Form. This will be your final review of the abstract.

  1. Technical questions about the E-PASS system or questions about abstracts or the review process should be addressed to
  2. The EurOMA 2017 Conference Co-chairs have access to your reviews and all comments in E-PASS. Based on the reviews returned, they shall make the final decision on each abstract as well as on the Conference Programme.



The dates for the EurOMA 2017 abstract review process are as follows:

  • Abstracts allocated to reviewers as of: January 31, 2017
  • Deadline for return of reviews: February 19, 2017



We will gratefully acknowledge your involvement with the EurOMA 2017 Scientific Committee in the Conference Programme and on the Conference website, on behalf of the EurOMA community.

Many thanks for your ongoing commitment and cooperation with this upcoming EurOMA festival!

Nigel Caldwell (Conference Chair)
Heriot Watt University



EurOMA is an international network of academics and practitioners from around the world who have a common interest in the continuing development of Operations Management.